The Assembly met at 10.30 am (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr McClelland] in the Chair).
Members observed two minutes’ silence.

Attacks on Schools and Schoolchildren

Mr John Kelly: On a point of order, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I want to refer to an interview given by Assemblyman McCrea to the ‘Mid-Ulster Mail’, which was carried in that paper last Thursday. In the interview the Member alleged that shadowy figures linked to IRA/Sinn Féin were responsible for acts of violence against schoolchildren in Maghera. The next day a school in Greenlough was burnt in a Loyalist arson attack.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Mr Kelly, this is not a point of order. I am going to move to the next item of business.

Mr John Kelly: Further to the point of order, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Is there any way in which Members can raise issues that are, in many ways, life-threatening to members of the Nationalist community?

Mr Donovan McClelland: That is a matter for the Standards and Privileges Committee. If you feel strongly about it you should write to the Clerk of that Committee.

Special EU Programmes: North/South Ministerial Council Sectoral Meeting

Mr Mark Durkan: The Council agreed that the various programmes in the remit of the Special European Union Programmes Body (SEUPB) had a major role to play in the development of peace and reconciliation and in economic and social progress on the island as a whole, particularly in the border areas. The Council looks forward to working closely with the SEUPB in implementing those important tasks.
The Council received a report on progress made towards recruiting a permanent chief executive. The post has been advertised and interviews are now being held. The Council noted the progress made and hoped that the permanent chief executive would be appointed as soon as possible to drive forward the important work of the body.
The Council received a report on actions taken to further the development of the SEUPB and was pleased to note that a second regional office of the body had opened temporary premises in Omagh and that permanent premises have been identified. The Omagh office will have lead responsibility for monitoring and promoting the implementation of the common chapter and particular responsibility for the cross-border priority of Peace II.
The Council highlighted the need for clarity on the roles and responsibilities of the body as it takes forward its developing work programme. The Council noted and endorsed the pace and nature of the developments of the SEUPB’s internal structures and mechanisms and its range of developing partnerships.
The Council noted that the negotiations on the Peace II operational programme were nearing conclusion and that the SEUPB had begun work on the programme complement. The Council attaches urgency to the completion of that work and hopes that negotiations with the European Commission on the operational programmes will be finalised as soon as possible.
The membership of the Peace II monitoring committee was announced at the meeting. The committee will be established in shadow format, pending the formal adoption of the Peace II programme by the European Commission. The Council expressed a desire for an early meeting of the committee to enable it to have an input to the development of the Peace II programme complement.
The Council approved the community initiative proposals for INTERREG III, Leader+ and EQUAL in Northern Ireland and Ireland, and the proposals for the URBAN II programme in Ireland for submission to the European Commission as a basis for negotiation.
The Council recalled the important responsibilities of the SEUPB for grant making and other managerial functions in respect of the North/South elements of all the community initiatives in Northern Ireland and Ireland. It also recalled the ongoing role that the SEUPB will have in implementing and monitoring community initiatives throughout their lifetimes.
The Council stressed the immediate need for the body to be directly involved in the forthcoming negotiations with the European Commission on the community initiative programme proposals provided for in the North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) (Northern Ireland) Order 1999. The Council requested that it be kept informed of progress on those negotiations.
The Council noted the progress made by the SEUPB in developing its responsibilities for monitoring and promoting implementation of the common chapter on cross- border co-operation contained in both Northern Ireland’s structural funds plan and Ireland’s national development plan. The Council agreed that delivery of the common chapter requires a consistent, coherent, co-ordinated approach to identification and implementation of cross- border co-operation on a North/South and east-west basis. The Council looks forward to a further progress report at the next sectoral meeting on EU programmes.
The Council approved the SEUPB’s draft corporate plan for 2000-03 and the draft business plan for 2000. A new corporate plan will be presented to the council early in the new year. The Council approved and welcomed the code of conduct for the staff of the body and is confident that staff will apply all aspects of the code in discharging its duties.
The Council considered a paper outlining the progress of spending on the Peace I programme and the INTERREG II programme. The Council noted the position on commitments of funds under both programmes and that overall expenditure at 30June2000 stood at 66% of the PeaceI allocation and 79% of the INTERREGII allocation. The Council agreed that this was an important area of work and that further sustained effort will be required to ensure that full expenditure is achieved by 31December2001. The Council also noted that the body will provide a further progress report on the implementation of both programmes at the next sectoral meeting on the special EUprogrammes. The Council agreed the text of a joint communiqué, which was issued following the meeting. A copy of the communiqué has been placed in the Assembly Library.
I would also like to cover two items that fall within my responsibilities and which were dealt with at the North/South Ministerial Council sectoral meeting on 17November. MsRodgers will be making a full statement on that meeting in due course. Following approval by the Executive Committee, the Council agreed final recommendations on the budgets for the six North/South implementation bodies. Details are set out in the table attached to my statement. The contributions from the North and South will go forward for approval by the Assembly and the Dáil respectively, as part of the Budgets and Estimates, North and South. Thus, the Executive have agreed the Northern contributions that will be recommended to the Assembly as part of the revised Budget that I will introduce next month.
The second item is the URBANII community initiative. The Executive Committee agreed on 16November that the URBANII programme proposals for NorthernIreland be submitted to the North/South Ministerial Council. This happened at the sectoral meeting on 17November, and the Council agreed to those proposals being submitted to the European Commission as a basis for negotiation over the next five months.

Mr Francie Molloy: A LeasCheann Comhairle, go raibh maith agat. I welcome the Minister’s statement on European funding. It is an important stepping stone, and we hope to make continued progress on it. Can the Minister tell us when PeaceII money will be available, so that groups with a gap in funding will be able to ensure the continuity of their projects? What problems are being encountered? Do they relate to match funding from other Departments and organisations to allow some of these groups to draw down the extra money for the completion of payments in those schemes?

Mr Mark Durkan: I thank the Chairperson of the Finance and Personnel Committee for his Committee’s interest in these areas.
First, we had hoped to be further forward with the proposals for the Peace II programme. There has been some delay in finalising the community support framework. Although it is the Commission’s document, the Administration has been working with the Commission on the operational programmes. That is the next stage. When operational programmes for PeaceII and transitional Objective1 are agreed, we will bring forward the more detailed proposals, within a few months, at the programme complement stage.
We are working on the operational programmes and the programme complements, but under EUregulations the monitoring committees have to be able to make an input to those. Our work would be assisted if we had everything we needed from all the NorthernIreland Government Departments. We are still awaiting some contributions on the operational programme. We are determined to try to proceed as quickly as possible because we recognise the expectations, the needs and the gaps. However, in all likelihood we will not be in a position to call for applications for PeaceII until the new year.
In relation to Peace I, the most up to date figure that I have is for the end of September. It shows that 70% of Peace I funds have now been drawn down. We have only until 31 December 2001 to complete that work. There are a range of issues and problems involved, and we are trying to identify the problems of particular sectors and groups to see whether we can come up with specific solutions.

Mr Eamonn ONeill: I welcome the Minister’s statement, which shows that considerable advance in this area has been made. Can he tell us about the role of local government in the administration of INTERREG III funding? It has been envisaged for some time that it would be done through the three cross-border committees that exist in Northern Ireland?
In reply to an earlier question of mine, the Minister indicated some favour towards the idea of an Assembly oversight committee for the administration of the EU programmes. Does he still see merit in such a suggestion and, if so, how could it be done?

Mr Mark Durkan: First, in respect of INTERREG III, further details will have to be worked on. Proposals for the basis of negotiation, approved by the Executive and the North/South Ministerial Council, have been submitted. We will give further consideration to precisely how local delivery, and area-based, mechanisms can facilitate that programme.
Mr ONeill mentioned cross-border networks. I have previously recognised how they have contributed to our understanding in this area. It would be wrong for me to say that those groups will be directly engaged as delivery mechanisms for INTERREG III. It would simply be inappropriate to make any promise at this stage, but clearly the cross-border network groups are particularly well placed to make proposals regarding INTERREG III. Obviously, they have submitted some critical comments about the present proposals, and they are well placed to make a further contribution to our thinking and to the life of the programme itself.
I am open to dealing with any Committee of the Assembly. I seem to be picking up Assembly Committees to work with; it is certainly a growth sector in my area of activity, and we can take another one if that is needed.
The issue is whether the Finance and Personnel Committee believes that there is a further, distinct role to be discharged regarding the Assembly’s interest in the community support framework and the various EU programmes, and whether it believes that anything distinctive could be done by another Committee. I recognise that other Members also have an interest in the question.

Mr Edwin Poots: Does the Minister acknowledge that the £1·2 million being allocated from the Executive’s Budget would be better spent in actual programmes within Northern Ireland? Does he recognise that the cross-border element reduces the ability of areas not along the border to tap into that money? Is there not, therefore, an element of discrimination against areas such as Lagan Valley?

Mr Mark Durkan: I repeat the point that the allocations being made to the six implementation bodies are not huge allocations when taken against the budget as a whole.
They are significant, but they go towards supporting some significant services and work by the bodies. Some of the work was already being undertaken in other forms and, as it has to continue, we feel that it will be performed and discharged better in the particular context of the North/South implementation bodies. There can be economies of scale and performance efficiencies through co-operating in that regard.
I refute any suggestion of discrimination against any part of Northern Ireland regarding EU programmes. Obviously, some EU programmes apply to specific areas, rather than to Northern Ireland as a whole. For example, URBAN II proposals apply particularly to north Belfast, but that does not mean that the rest of Northern Ireland is discriminated against because it is not benefiting directly from URBAN II. Mr Poots may not have noticed that the whole of Northern Ireland will be eligible under INTERREG III as opposed to previous INTERREG programmes. I am at a loss to understand why there should be any suggestion of discrimination against any part of Northern Ireland.

Mr Alex Maskey: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I welcome the Minister’s statement. However, I have a specific concern about the presence of Mr Dermot Nesbitt, given his recent comments in the press, where he claimed to be quoting from the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) report. Subsequently we were told that it is not a report but simply a briefing for the various Ministers.
Given that Mr Nesbitt has responsibility, in the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, for matters including equality, his remarks, which were quoted in the local press, are of great concern to all of us. He suggested that NISRA said — I do not know whether they are saying it, because I have not seen the briefing — that there was no discrimination between the communities. What input did Mr Nesbitt have at the sectoral meeting, given the major role that EU programmes have in ending discrimination and given that Mr Nesbitt is on public record as saying that it did not exist?

Mr Mark Durkan: Mr Nesbitt was one of two Ministers from the Northern side who were present at the meeting. I was the other Minister. I am making the report because these matters are within the responsibility of my Department. We participated in the meeting on the basis of the papers and positions approved by the Executive Committee, which is the proper way to do business at the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC).
I note Mr Maskey’s concerns about the comments made by Mr Nesbitt on a previous occasion about another issue, but I hope that Mr Maskey is not suggesting that more parties should engage in vetting tactics as far as other Ministers’ participation in the NSMC is concerned. I am happy to participate with any Minster from any other party in NSMC business on behalf of the Executive on proper, approved and agreed terms. I hope that everybody else would do the same. I do not think that anything would be gained by saying that we will not go to certain meetings with certain Ministers because of other issues that may arise.

Ms Jane Morrice: I welcome the details of what is happening in the European structural fund programmes. However, I would be grateful for further clarification on a number of points. I would like to focus on the funding mechanisms under Peace I and Peace II. First, is it the definition of funding bodies that is holding up the negotiations on Peace II? Secondly, will the Minister make it clear that the intermediary funding bodies that existed under Peace I and the district councils will have a role to play under Peace II. What role will that be?
Finally, will the six North/South implementation bodies carry out a funding function similar to that of the intermediary funding bodies, and will their funding come from European programmes, particularly Peace?

Mr Mark Durkan: First, the negotiations on Peace II are ongoing. As I said, the community support framework — the Commission’s paper, which we had expected would be formalised in the summer — has taken longer than expected. Nevertheless, negotiations are proceeding in respect of the operational programme and the programme complements. There are a number of issues that need to be explored by ourselves and the European Commission. It would help our officials if we had the necessary material from all the Northern Ireland Government Departments.
The intermediary funding bodies have made a useful, distinctive and helpful contribution to Peace I. We see the importance of such a role continuing with Peace II, but we must put that work out to tender. That would be consistent with the European Commission’s own requirements. The European Court of Auditors’ report was somewhat critical of the fact that it had not happened in Peace I. It would also be appropriate with regard to public procurement policy.
We are continuing to engage with a range of interests — local partnerships and local government, as well as staying in touch with others such as the intermediary funding bodies on how best to develop local delivery mechanisms and local funding arrangements during the Peace II programme. A working group involving representatives from district partnerships, local government and intermediary funding bodies will shortly be making proposals to me in that regard.

Mr Joe Byrne: I welcome the Minister’s progress report on the workings of the special EU programmes body. I am delighted that the Omagh office is now open and that it will monitor and promote the implementation of the common chapter and have responsibility for the cross- border priority of Peace II.
How will the North/South Ministerial Council endeavour to make the common chapter a more meaningful, practical and relevant exercise in the next round of structural funds? Unfortunately, in the 1994-99 round, the common chapter became an illusion rather than a meaningful exercise. That was particularly disappointing for those of us who live in the border zone. There is a need for real North/South co-operation on transport infrastructure.

Mr Mark Durkan: Mr Charlie McCreevy, Mr Dermot Nesbitt and I were glad to have the meeting — the first Northern meeting in sectoral format — in Omagh, not least to mark the fact that there will be an office of the special EU programmes body in the town. As Mr Byrne said, that office will have a particular focus on the cross- border activities of Peace I and on the implementation of the common chapter.
He is also right in pointing out that it is not the first time that there has been a common chapter. I have said elsewhere that the previous common chapter was a great book but the movie never got made. This time we at least have a production system for the special EU programmes body and a North/South Ministerial Council with a dedicated sectoral format that can consider those issues. I welcome particularly the commitment of Mr McCreevy and his colleagues in the Irish Government to pursue the common chapter actively and effectively. We need to make sure that we are not just making commitments that are notionally on a cross-border basis but that do not mesh on a North/South basis. It is not just the quantity of cross-border activity that counts, it is the quality, and the body and the North/South Ministerial Council both wish to see it developed effectively.

Mr Nigel Dodds: How do the budget figures for the implementation bodies set out in the annex to the Minister’s statement compare with the figures in his recent Budget statement? On what basis was it calculated that the projected budget provisions for 2002 would increase by 9·6%, compared to this year’s figure, and for 2003 by 16·13%, compared to this year’s figure? Can the Minister explain in detail how he arrived at those figures?

Mr Mark Durkan: The figures for 2001 and 2002 in the draft Northern Ireland Budget were based on financial years. Those figures do not, therefore, correspond precisely with the budgets for the bodies, which are expressed on the basis of calendar years. This is not the first time that I have made that point.
Any further revisions are subject to confirmation by the relevant sector of the North/South Ministerial Council. Some adjustments will be made in respect of the trade body. There will probably be a reduction of £200,000 in the amount proposed in the draft Budget. That will ensure consistency with the decisions taken at NSMC level. Similarly, there will be an increase of probably £400,000 in the allocation to the languages body to reflect that body’s activities.
The future projections are based on the plans brought forward by the bodies and approved by the North/South Ministerial Council, both in its relevant sectoral format and in plenary session. The plans were discussed in plenary forum at Dublin Castle in September and again in the various sectoral formats, and have been approved by the Northern Ireland Executive on that basis.

Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission: North/South Ministerial Council Sectoral Meeting

Ms Brid Rodgers: The third meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council for the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights sector took place on 10 November in Newcastle, County Down. Following nomination by the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, Mr Dermot Nesbitt and I represented Northern Ireland. Mr Frank Fahey TD, Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, represented the Irish Government.
The Executive Committee noted the papers for the NSMC on 9 November 2000. The meeting opened with useful updates from the chairman of the board of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission, Mr Peter Savage, and the chief executive, Mr Derick Anderson. The chairman outlined the Loughs Agency’s progress in establishing subcommittees on shell fisheries, marine tourism and finance and audit.
The shell fisheries subcommittee proposes to undertake a programme of visits to other shell fisheries on the island of Ireland to see the co-ordinated local agricultural management systems in operation. It is hoped that the system will provide a model on which to base shell fisheries management in Lough Foyle and Carlingford Lough. The marine tourism subcommittee attended a seminar organised by the Marine Institute and the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources on grant-aid proposals. The finance and audit subcommittee approved the re-prioritisation of in-year expenditure and considered the estimated needs for 2001.
Board members have also undertaken familiarisation visits to see drift and draft netting, fish population counting and fish counters, electro-fishing and oyster farming. The chief executive updated the meeting on staffing matters in both areas, particularly on progress on recruitment in the Carlingford area. He also advised that the agency had secured accommodation in Carlingford, which it hopes to occupy from 1 December. The chief executive also updated the meeting on population, catch and production data for salmon and shellfish in both areas, on the extent of seizures of illegal nets and, most worryingly, on the level of aggression with which river watchers have to contend in carrying out their duties.
The Council then considered and approved a number of papers. These were: proposals on consultation with fisheries interests in the Carlingford Lough and Foyle areas; preparation by the agency of four sets of Regulations on salmon carcass tagging to extend protection to migratory salmonids on a stretch of the River Mourne, to lift a ban on angling on a stretch of the River Foyle, to extend close seasons in both the Carlingford and Foyle areas, and to provide for a coarse angling licence in the Carlingford area; and a paper bringing forward costed proposals regarding grant-aid in the year 2001 for aquaculture, fisheries development, marine tourism, marketing, training and education, and the use of consultancies.
In addition, the Council was updated on the making of the legislation to enhance the functions of the Loughs Agency of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission in line with the North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) (Northern Ireland) Order 1999, and on the transfer of the functions of the Commissioners of Irish Lights to the body.
At the request of Waterways Ireland, the Council approved a compulsory purchase order on land in County Longford to allow for the construction of a single-span bridge, thereby facilitating the completion of the restoration of the Royal Canal.
Finally, the Council agreed to meet again in February or March 2001, and approved the issue of a joint communiqué, a copy of which has been placed in the Library. I make this report on behalf of Mr Nesbitt and myself.

Mr Jim Wilson: I welcome the Minister’s statement. I note that board members have undertaken familiarisation visits to see drift and draft netting, fish population counting with fish counters, and electro-fishing. When will the Minister, through the Council, begin to pursue a policy of banning all forms of netting? Is she considering the allocation of funds to begin the process of buying out netting enterprises?
Will the Minister further confirm whether the aggression experienced by the river watchers in the execution of their duties occurred on the northern or southern shore of the lough?
Finally, will the Minister also give details of the extent of the problem posed by illegal nets? Can the problem be quantified in terms of salmon lost and income lost?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I am not sure that the first part of the question relates to my report. The aggression experienced by the river watchers was in the Foyle area. Two of the agency’s river watchers were attacked by a group of men while carrying out their duties in the Sion Mills area. The Loughs Agency fully supported the officers and asked the police to investigate. I know that a private river watcher suffered intimidation in the Omagh area and, despite this, subsequently gave evidence at a court case in which a prosecution was obtained. I commend those people; they do a difficult job, and it was very courageous of that river watcher to go ahead with the prosecution despite the fact that he had been threatened.
I am not aware of any plans to ban netting at this stage. In answer to the last part of the question, I repeat that the aggression occurred on the northern side.

Mr Eddie McGrady: When will the Loughs Agency be in a position to provide services and consultation, particularly in the Carlingford Lough area? The Minister may be aware that the Carlingford Lough Owners Association was promised consultation with respect to new developments and matters affecting it. Is she aware that a planning application is being made for yet another shellfish processing plant, that the association was not consulted and only read about it in the newspapers? Will the Minister undertake to investigate the matter and see that the proper and appropriate consultation will be carried out, even if the Loughs Agency is not yet in a position to do that?

Ms Brid Rodgers: In the Carlingford area, the Loughs Agency premises will be occupied on 1December. Staff recruitment is proceeding and we hope to have the premises fully operational at the beginning of next year. In the meantime, the offices will be used for meetings and consultation.
The SDLP is fully committed to consultation. I am not aware of the specific issue that the Member raised. I am surprised to hear about the difficulties and that no consultation has taken place on the specific area that he speaks of. I will have the matter investigated, and I will report back to the Member.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: Can the Minister give the House any idea of the extent of damage to salmon and shellfish population in both areas as a result of poaching? How many arrests and prosecutions have been made, how many prosecutions are pending, and what penalty can we expect to see imposed upon those who are convicted?

Ms Brid Rodgers: The Foyle Commission has a good record of policing poaching in the area. I cannot give specific numbers at this stage, but I will come back to the Member with the numbers.

Mr Gerry McHugh: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Does the Minister believe that the four sets of proposals for salmon protection on the Foyle and the Mourne will be sufficient to protect future tourism and the other gains that that would bring to the area?
There are important issues here that are strongly dependent on the North/South Ministerial Council working properly and the First Minister allowing these issues to be progressed.

Ms Brid Rodgers: The Member asks whether I am happy with the measures being taken for the protection of salmon in the area. The answer is yes. We are preparing legislation on salmon tagging, and I am satisfied that those measures will be successful and that preservation of stocks, which is of key importance, will be satisfactory.
The other part of the question was about the working of the North/South Ministerial Council. It is working extremely effectively, as my report will show. The work is done on an all-island basis. For example, we will have the same policy and manner of salmon tagging throughout the whole island, and that is important. I am satisfied that the North/South aspect is working effectively.

Mr P J Bradley: Will the Minister expand on the Loughs Agency’s proposal to provide grant-aid in 2001?

Ms Brid Rodgers: The North/South Ministerial Council has authorised the preparation of proposals for grant-aid schemes by the Loughs Agency in agriculture, commercial wild fisheries and marine tourism, including marketing, training and education, and consultancies. The legislation to provide for grant-aid schemes is being drafted, and it is expected that Regulations will be in place to allow for the consideration of applications for grant-aid in the latter part of 2001.

Mr Gardiner Kane: Can the Minister tell the House the cost of the latest meeting and what proportion of that cost was paid by her Department? Does she believe that that is the best use of her Department’s scarce resources?

Ms Brid Rodgers: The costs were paid by the joint secretariat. I cannot specify the exact cost, but I do not expect that it was very great. The benefit, as I have explained, will outweigh the cost of the meeting.

Mr David Ford: Mr Bradley asked about grant-aid and tourist development. Will the Minister place the paper under consideration in the Assembly Library in the near future for the benefit of Members, given the importance of this field in developing our tourism infrastructure?
Secondly, I questioned the Minister on the issue of consultation bodies — or even a single consultation body — relating to the function of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission. Are there any further proposals to have consultation, so that the range of operations may be developed?

Ms Brid Rodgers: The answer to the first part of the Member’s question is yes.
With regard to the second part of his question, I can tell him that the agency is aware of the need for consultation. There are many interests to be taken into consideration. Many people want to be consulted and to have input into the making of the legislation. The Loughs Agency is developing a formal procedure for consulting its customers and other parties in the Foyle and Carlingford areas who have an interest in its work. As part of the process, the agency recently invited interested parties to make suggestions on how the agency should establish consultation arrangements in order to ensure that interested parties are given the opportunity to have an input into the agency’s decision-making process.
The outcome of the exercise is that the agency plans to establish an advisory forum and focus groups on which local fishing interests will be represented. The Member will be interested to learn that a consultant has been retained by the agency to recruit members independently to the forum and the focus groups to ensure that all interests are represented and that the representatives are truly independent.

Mr Eamonn ONeill: I join other Members in welcoming the Minister’s statement and the advances that are being made in this important work, considering that neither game nor coarse fish know where the border lies. We must do what we can to make sure that everything goes well. Can the Minister tell us what the Loughs Agency’s proposals are? What promotion will be necessary for the development of coarse angling in the Carlingford area in general? She might also care to comment on the Loughs Agency’s powers to license agricultural operations in the same area.

Ms Brid Rodgers: The agency proposes to carry out an initial survey of potential coarse angling in the Carlingford area and, in particular, in Newry canal.
The agency is liaising with scientific staff to design and initiate those surveys. It also proposes to draw up and implement a coarse angling development programme in partnership with local angling clubs and district councils.
Legislation is being prepared to regulate aquaculture in both loughs, and I hope to be able to bring it forward in the new year. There has been wide consultation with interested bodies in the preparation of the legislation.

BSE

Mr Donovan McClelland: I have received notice from the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development that she wishes to make a statement on BSE.
(Mr Speaker in the Chair)

Ms Brid Rodgers: Last Monday, at the European Agriculture Council meeting in Brussels, I had discussions with British Agriculture Minister, Nick Brown, the other UK Agriculture Ministers and the Republic’s Agriculture Minister, Joe Walsh. I also had a meeting with the Health Commissioner, David Byrne. Members will be aware of the increased level of awareness of BSE and heightened public concerns arising from recent development in France and other member states.
In the light of those discussions and, in particular, of the increase in the incidence of BSE in Northern Ireland this year, as well as the current climate with regard to BSE in other member states, I have reviewed my position on a formal submission to the Commission to call for a relaxation of the export ban. I have also taken into account concerns expressed by other member states about a call from Northern Ireland for a relaxation of the ban at this time.
I have decided, therefore, that it would be inappropriate and possibly counterproductive for me to proceed with the case at the moment. I am still fully committed to obtaining a relaxation of the export ban for Northern Ireland. In the meantime, my Department will finalise its proposals in light of the consultation exercise and the findings of the recent inspection carried out in Northern Ireland by the EU Food and Veterinary Office. It will also continue to hold informal discussions with the Commission at official level. I will consider the action that should be taken in Northern Ireland to ensure that we comply with the European Agriculture Council’s conclusions and the resultant decision of the Standing Veterinary Committee.

Mr George Savage: The Minister should not be intimidated by the re-emergence of the BSE problem  in France and now in Germany. She should cash in at this time by highlighting the benefits of traceability, rather than doing nothing, as she, in effect, proposes. Now is the time to put traceability to the test. In the wake of the earlier BSE crisis, Northern Ireland put in place the most sophisticated and rigorous tracing system for beef cattle in Europe. As a result, Northern Ireland and British beef is now the safest in Europe.
We should be vigorously promoting the real, comparative safety of Northern Ireland beef. Does the Minister agree that, by doing that, we could recapture lost markets and alleviate the real distress felt by farmers?

Ms Brid Rodgers: First, I am not abandoning the objective of relaxing the ban. Neither I nor my Department have stopped work on this issue. Work will continue on dealing with the proposals which we are adjusting in the light of the consultation and the need to ensure that they are accepted. I understand the frustration of the Member and the farmers because I share these feelings, but I have decided that the most important consideration is that we achieve the right result.
Going now would not get the right result. I was in Brussels last Monday and saw the atmosphere of panic resulting from the new BSE scare in France and other countries. I took advice, and I spoke to a number of other Agriculture Ministers — Joe Walsh, Nick Brown and others. I also had a lengthy meeting with the Commissioner. The advice that I got from all quarters, and which I feel instinctively is the right advice, was that this is not a good time or a good context within which to try to convince the other member states that we should have a relaxation of the ban. I agree with the Member that we have an excellent traceability system. All those issues will come into play when the time is right, but we must remember that we will get one shot at this and that we must take that shot only when the time is right and when we are going to get what we want.

Mr P J Bradley: The Minister referred to the increase in BSE in France and Germany and also Northern Ireland. What is the increase in BSE incidence in Northern Ireland? What is responsible for it, and what action is she taking to deal with it?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I shall put the cases of BSE in perspective. In 1992, we had almost 500 cases here. That gradually decreased until 1998, when we had 18 cases. Last year, we had only six cases, but, unfortunately, this year we have had 20. That is not a cause for concern, but, at present, people in Europe are unable to look at it logically. The epidemiology suggests that when it falls to the low numbers, there will no longer be a regular downward decline; there will be a bump — an irregularity — at the bottom. One will have good years, when the numbers are low, and bad years. That is the position.
We will continue with the strict controls that are already in place. We have the strictest and toughest controls in Europe, and I do not intend to have any further controls, as they are not necessary. As Mr Savage said, we have an excellent traceability system.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: Given the Minister’s failure to achieve low-incidence BSE status, and given her comment in the House today that it is not the right time to get it, can she tell us, instead of prevaricating, when the right time will come to achieve low-incidence BSE status? Has the Minister made any representations to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF), to the UK representative or to any of her European competitors that French beef ought now to be banned from import to Northern Ireland in order to protect consumers’ rights and the rights of local producers? When did she make such representations? To whom did she make them? Does the Minister accept that now is the time for us to be seeking the alternative, which we called for in September 2000 and before the summer recess, to the current strategy that her Department is pursuing?

Ms Brid Rodgers: In the first place, I do not accept that I have failed in not getting low-incidence BSE status. The Member will appreciate that I started to seek low-incidence BSE status as one of my main priorities almost a year ago. He will also know that, for reasons beyond my control — and reasons that I did not agree with — there was a three-month hiccup that year, during which I was unable to do anything because of the suspension, which the Member fully supported. I have not been prevaricating; I have been absolutely open and honest in saying that the time is not now right. As a Minister, I bear responsibility for ensuring that we put our case at the time when its strength will be viewed reasonably, and not in the present context of panic.
Secondly, I have made representations to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) in my search for a relaxation of the ban. The Member, who is on the Food Safety Agency, raised the issue of the safety of French beef. I want to assure the Member that I have taken every opportunity to engage in discussions with the other member states, and in particular with France. I have had meetings with French officials twice in the past number of months to ensure that when we come to put our case we will get their full support, which will be extremely important.
As we seek to gain the support of other member states for the relaxation of the ban, it will be more useful to dwell on positive points than on negative ones.

Mr Gerry McHugh: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. By moving into a fallback position, is there not a danger that we could give out the wrong message? The consumer could infer that we are guilty by association of not making our case at a time when Europe is looking for disease-free beef, which we have had for some time. Does the Minister see that as a danger? If our case was right the week before this happened in Europe, it must still be right. Will the Government consider doing something for local farmers, who now face a serious drop in prices because of the fallout from Europe?

Ms Brid Rodgers: We will not give out the wrong message. As I have explained, the decision that I have taken is the correct decision. The current situation in Europe is that member states are not prepared to listen to rational argument and to our strong case. Therefore, it would be foolish in the extreme for me to fire ahead on the basis that we can put a good case and say, "To hell with the circumstances." I agree with the Member that we have a good case on the basis of our numbers and our extremely strict controls. However, I will not put a good case at a bad time. Our message is strong, and people will hear it when they are in a position to listen.
The proposal to relax the export ban has been deferred only because of the current climate. I still intend to submit the proposal to the Commission when the time is right. Producers can feel heartened that the proposal will go to the Commission, but in the meantime the status quo will be maintained. I received £2 million in the Budget for the beef quality initiative. I was also allocated £300,000 in the monitoring round to kick-start the beef quality initiative, which in due course should help beef prices.

Mr David Ford: I am not sure that I welcome the Minister’s statement, but I welcome the fact that she has come to tell the Assembly about the rather bad situation that we are in. I can assure her that from this corner of the House she will hear no knee-jerk anti-Europeanism of the sort that she has heard elsewhere.
The Minister mentioned the support that has been received in the past from Nick Brown and other UK Ministers, and from Joe Walsh. Do they still support her decision to apply for special status when she sees the time as right? Notwithstanding the current problems with France and Germany and the difficulty in getting a rational decision, has the Minister had meetings with other Governments in order to build up support, so that when the time is right we will not have to start looking for supporters of our case?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I am happy that I still have the full support of Nick Brown and the Scottish and Welsh Ministers over the relaxation of the ban for Northern Ireland, in spite of the adverse implications for them. I also have and have always had the full support of Joe Walsh in the Republic. I have not yet come to the stage of doing the rounds of the other European states to look for support for my proposals. I am waiting until we are ready to put the proposal formally — that is the best time to move on it.
I have had discussions with the French in the margins of other conferences on two occasions. I have not had discussions with other countries so far, but when the time is right and we are beginning to move towards the formal proposals, I intend to go to the various European countries to speak to them. Indeed, the agriculture attachés from the different embassies in London are coming to Northern Ireland soon. In preparation for putting the case, I am also going over to inform them of exactly how good our controls are and how low the incidence is of BSE.

Mr John Dallat: I agree with the Minister that the Assembly should be sending out a positive message. On that basis, can she assure us that the controls imposed on farmers by the Department will strengthen our case when it is presented? Secondly — perhaps this sounds repetitive — does the Minister think that there will ever be a right time to proceed, given the work that she has already carried out in this field?

Ms Brid Rodgers: Will the time ever be right? That is a good question. I had hoped that the time was right six months ago. The fact that circumstances are not right at the moment is beyond my control. However, I am sure that the right time will come. The time will come when the panic is over, when our case will be even stronger. As people look around Europe and see our level of incidence and our controls, compared with those of other countries, they will be easier to convince and, in a calmer situation, the strength of our case will be noted.
I am under no illusion that we can get away with poor record keeping. If we are to get out of this mess and get the ban lifted, we must be sure that we can compete with the best, and maintaining proper herd records is essential for that reason. Traceability, both pre- and post-slaughter, will become even more essential as a result of the latest BSE developments in Europe. We are well placed, and that can be seen when compared with the records of our rivals. We also have a serious problem with bovine TB and brucellosis. Therefore it is important for us to keep accurate accounts. Nonetheless, I am satisfied that our controls are extremely good.

Mr Gardiner Kane: Does the Minister share the opinion of many of those in the industry that the United Kingdom Government should unilaterally ban French beef imports, thereby ensuring that markets for our own highly regulated product avoid being saturated with cheap, unsafe and origin-unknown French beef? I am disappointed that the Minister has failed to call for a ban on French beef.

Ms Brid Rodgers: As I have already said, the question of banning French beef is one for the Food Safety Agency, which is looking at the issue. If the Food Safety Agency concludes that French beef is not safe, it will be a matter for the UK Government, and I expect that they will take action because public health is and must remain a priority.

Ms Carmel Hanna: How does the incidence of BSE in Northern Ireland compare with that in other member states? Is it lower than in France? What are the public health implications of this year’s increase?

Ms Brid Rodgers: There were 20 cases in Northern Ireland this year, an unfortunate increase from last year’s six. In Office International des Epizooties (OIE) low incidence terms, that is equivalent to 25 per million. Incidence in the Republic is 101 this year, which is equivalent to 27 per million under the OIE criteria. In France, the incidence in the nine years prior to 2000 was 80. This year alone it is 86, which is a huge increase, but still only equivalent to six per million. Our incidence this year is three times that of France. Of course, we had an incidence of almost 500 in 1992, whereas we now have 20, so we can make a good case.
In Northern Ireland, as in the rest of the UK, animals of over 30 months — which is when they become more suspect — are not allowed into the food chain. Only animals of under 30 months are allowed into the food chain in Northern Ireland. Even those animals have all specified risk material removed before they go into the food chain. Therefore all our precautions and controls are extremely tough and strict, and there are no health implications.

Mr Edwin Poots: Does the Minister recognise that it was she who set a date of October 2000 to have the beef ban lifted, thereby misleading the agricultural community? When will the ban be lifted? She told the Assembly that it would be March 2001. Is it going to be October 2001, October 2002, or October 2003? Is she implying that the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development did nothing during the Assembly’s suspension from February until April 2000? Given her performance, the Minister should be renamed Minister for Prevarication and Rural Desolation.
How many cases of BSE in cattle under the age of 36 months have there been in Northern Ireland? Do the new tests that will apply to all cattle over the age of 36 months not represent an opportunity to further our campaign to get the beef ban lifted? All animals will then be tested and will not, therefore, have BSE.

Ms Brid Rodgers: I hope that I will remember all those questions. If not, the Member will probably remind me.
First, I did not set a date. In response to questions in the House as to when I thought we would be able to move, I said that I hoped to move on specific dates in October. Recently, I said that I hoped to achieve a relaxation of the ban in March or April 2000. I do not have a crystal ball, and, unlike some Members, I do not have a direct line to the Almighty. Therefore, I could not here forecast this current crisis in Europe, for instance.
I do not take any responsibility for things that are beyond my control. I take responsibility only for things that I can influence. To that end, I have worked extremely hard to get the ban relaxed. There is no implication that my staff did nothing for the three months that I was out of office. I am being attacked for not doing anything, not my staff. I cannot influence French officials, French Ministers or Irish Ministers when I am not in office.
The Member said that new tests will be carried out on all cattle over 30 months. That is not the situation as I understand it. It is not yet clear what the Standing Veterinary Committee (SVC) is saying. We are still interpreting it.
The European Union has insisted that 2,500 cattle be tested over the next year, beginning on 1 January 2001. The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development has begun that task ahead of schedule — we are ahead of the game. All cattle of over 30 months going into the food chain may have to be tested, but as none over 30 months goes into the food chain in Northern Ireland, it may not be necessary to test them all. Mr Poots may, of course, have some source of inspiration or knowledge denied to me.

Rev William McCrea: I do not claim to have a direct line to heaven on this serious matter. It is not a game, although certain Members sitting behind the hon Lady seem to treat it as such. I know that the Minister takes it seriously.
Two cases of BSE have been reported in Germany, while in France, where the situation is grave, 107 cases have been reported. However, there are 101 cases in the Irish Republic, but there is no stir or sense of urgency about them. Are people in Northern Ireland and Great Britain protected against potentially infected meat from BSE animals from the Irish Republic? How will the Minister ensure that Europe deals effectively with the problem there?

Ms Brid Rodgers: The incidence of BSE in Northern Ireland is currently 25 per million, while in the Irish Republic it is 27 per million. Clearly the rate in Northern Ireland is lower. It is illegal for any country to sell cattle of over 30 months of age to Northern Ireland and introduce them into the food chain here. The problem exists across the United Kingdom, and we are examining how it might be resolved. The Food Safety Agency is immediately undertaking a risk assessment of French beef. The over-30-month regulations are being rigorously enforced at meat processing plants and by retailers, and all beef for the domestic market has to be certified as coming from animals of under 30 months. The Commission is being pressed to ensure that the compulsory labelling of meat and processed products clearly states the country of origin.

Fire Service: Award

Ms Bairbre de Brún: A Cheann Comhairle. Is mian liom tuairisciú don Tionól gur aithbhreithnigh an Coiste Feidhmiúcháin a chinneadh gur chóir don Údarás Dóiteáin bonn a bhualadh le bronnadh ar throdaithe dóiteáin agus a bpearsanra cúnta ar son na seirbhíse suntasaí a sholáthair an tSeirbhís Dóiteáin le tríocha bliain agus shocraigh sé gurbh fhóirsteanaí Duais Chorporáideach.
Bhí an Coiste den bharúil fosta gur chóir d’Oifig an Chéad-Aire agus an LeasChéad-Aire fiosrú an mbeadh Duais Stáit ionghnóthachana nó fóirsteanach.
Beidh a fhios ag Teachtaí gur cuireadh fáilte roimh chinneadh an Choiste Feidhmiúcháin i Meitheamh maidir le bronnadh meadáillí ag an Údarás Dóiteáin ar dtús, ach mhéadaigh ar an imní a léirigh ionadaithe na dtrodaithe dóiteáin nach raibh a leithéid de dhuais fóirsteanach. Ar aon dul leis an Choiste Feidhmiúcháin, phléigh mé na hábhair chúraim seo le hionadaithe Cheardchumann na mBriogáidí Dóiteáin, a mhol roinnt roghanna. Chuir mé na barúlacha seo in iúl don Choiste Feidhmiúcháin ag a chruinniú deireanach agus chinn an Coiste Feidhmiúcháin glacadh leis na moltaí aithbhreithnithe atá mé i ndiaidh a fhógairt.
Mar a dúirt mé leis an Tionól i Meitheamh, murach misneach agus oilteacht ár dtrodaithe dóiteáin agus ról tábhachtach fhoireann cúnta na mbriogáidí bheadh na mílte marbh atá beo inniu. Is mian liomsa agus le mo Chomhghleacaithe sa Choiste Feidhmiúcháin aitheantas a thabhairt don tseirbhís shuntasach seo ar dhóigh fhóirsteanach inghlactha.
I wish to report to the Assembly that the Executive have reviewed their decision that the Fire Authority should strike a medallion to be awarded to firefighters and support personnel in recognition of the outstanding service that they have provided over the past 30 years, deciding instead that a corporate award by the Assembly would be more appropriate. The Executive also agreed that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister should investigate whether a state award would also be achievable or appropriate.
Members will be aware that, while the Executive’s June decision regarding the awarding of medallions by the Fire Authority was initially welcomed, firefighters’ representatives subsequently expressed growing concern that such an award was not appropriate. With the agreement of the Executive, I discussed those concerns with representatives of the Fire Brigades Union, who suggested a number of options. I informed the Executive of those views at our last meeting, and we decided to adopt the revised proposals that I have just announced.
As I said to the Assembly in June, many people owe their lives to the courage and skill of our firefighters and the important contribution of brigade support staff. My Executive colleagues and I wish to recognise that outstanding service in an appropriate and acceptable way.

Dr Joe Hendron: I welcome the Minister’s statement. Members will be in total agreement that the outstanding service of those in the Fire Brigade who have so gallantly provided a service to the entire community over the past 30 years should be recognised in an appropriate and acceptable way. We should also take into account the views of the families of those firefighters who gave their lives — something I myself have seen in West Belfast. I note that the Executive, in reaching their decision on the type of award, have taken on board the views of representatives of the Fire Brigades Union.
A corporate award from the Assembly is, of course, appropriate. However, does the Minister agree that other organisations and individuals, with the possible inclusion of the Secretary of State himself, may wish to honour the Fire Service? It is, of course, a matter for those people.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: I join with the Member in paying tribute to the work of the Fire Service over the period in question. It is important that we pay tribute to it, and that is why the Executive Committee took the decision to ensure that the most appropriate award be made. There will be further discussion of the issue in this afternoon’s debate. There may well be others who wish to honour the Fire Service, but we must consider what the Executive feel. The Assembly will also wish to take this forward in accordance with its own wishes.

Mr Paul Berry: Is the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety once again being political, brushing such a serious decision off onto the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister? I remind the Minister that her remit covers the Fire Service. The Department should recommend that a state medal be awarded to the Fire Service, whose members have served this community with great distinction.

Mr Speaker: What the Member is suggesting is not necessarily in order. It is not for a Department or the Executive to confer a state award. That is entirely a matter for the sovereign, who is the fount of all such awards. Of course, it is possible for anyone, including any individual, the Department, or the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, to make a recommendation. I simply want to make it clear that the decision would be one well beyond the responsibilities of the Assembly. However, I give the Minister the opportunity to respond, if she so chooses.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: The Executive decided that we needed to consider the form that a state award might take and whether it is achievable and fully acceptable to the firefighters. The Executive will consider the matter again when the work has been completed.

Ms Sue Ramsey: Go raibh maith agat. Fire Authority personnel are drawn from all sections of the community. As the Good Friday Agreement calls for sensitivity on flags and emblems, may I ask whether the Minister is satisfied that a corporate award is the best way to ensure that every member of the Fire Service would be happy to accept it?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: The Member will be aware of my position, which is that any award, at any stage, should be such that all who are to receive the award would be happy to accept it. It is not for me to say this morning what kind of corporate award should be made. I merely point out that the Executive have decided that a corporate award by the Assembly would be more appropriate.

Mrs Eileen Bell: I totally endorse the Minister’s comments on the bravery and commitment of the Fire Service over the years. I withdrew my motion on the Fire Service some weeks ago, as I had been advised that the Executive would take a decision on the matter. I am sorry that the DUP, unlike ourselves, did not wait for that Executive decision but relaunched its motion for reasons that seem to have nothing to do with the wishes of most firefighters. Can the Minister assure the Assembly that the matter will be dealt with as a priority?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: The Executive will take it forward with all speed. I repeat that, although the Executive have decided that a corporate award by the Assembly would be more appropriate, it is not for the Executive to dictate to the Assembly how that is done or the timescale.

Mr Gardiner Kane: How much finance will the Department make available for the corporate award? What are the criteria for receiving such an award?

Mr Speaker: As the Minister has repeatedly said, although the Executive may decide that an award would be appropriate, the award will not be from the Executive or the Department but from the Assembly. The decision is one for the Assembly. If the Assembly were to decide — and it might decide such a thing today —it would probably be for the Commission to take forward the practicalities.
However, the question relates to something that is not in order. If the Member would like to reframe his question, he may do so.
12.00

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. If it is not in order for a Member to ask that question, why is the issue before the House today? Why has the Minister made a statement if we cannot ascertain from her what finances will be made available?

Mr Speaker: It is entirely in order for the Minister to state the view of the Executive that the Assembly should make an award to the Fire Service. It is a ministerial statement, and it is entirely in order for the Executive’s view to be expressed. It is, of course, for the Assembly to make a decision about the matter of an award, as I have explained.
I take from that point of order that Mr Kane does not wish to reframe or restate his question.

Mr David Ford: I welcome the Minister’s statement, but I regret that one party in the Chamber seems determined to drag politics into this issue, whereas those of us who proposed it in the first place were trying to recognise the service and the sacrifice of firefighters, and not make cheap political points.
The Minister referred to work to be done by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister with regard to a state award. How will information about that work, which is not being done by her Department, be conveyed to the Assembly? What is the likely timescale?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: I recognise that the intention of the Members who brought forward the previous motion was to ensure that the firefighters would be given due recognition — an objective that my Executive colleagues and I share.
The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister will investigate whether a state award is achievable or appropriate. It is not for me to determine at this point with whom they will consult. However, I am sure that there will be consultation with all interested parties when they have ascertained the necessary information, which they will do now with all speed. Whatever the outcome, it is important that there should be a full understanding of the position and full support for any proposal that emerges.

Mr Jim Shannon: Did the Minister or her Department have discussions with the Fire Brigades Union and the Fire Authority? During those discussions, did not the members and representatives of those organisations suggest that a recommendation for a state award would be the best way forward and a suitable way of recognising the work, and the courage that the Fire Service has shown over the past 35 years?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: With the agreement of the Executive, I had discussions with the Fire Brigades Union, and I brought its views to the Executive. It is not correct for the Member to suggest that it expressed the preference that he has suggested.

Mrs Joan Carson: I welcome the fact that the Executive have decided that the Fire Service of Northern Ireland, after working through 30 years of terrorism, needs a proper award. A civic award would be an insult, and that idea has already been rejected by both the Fire Brigades Union and the Fire Authority itself. A state award, granted by Her Majesty the Queen, to recognise professionalism, bravery and commitment, would be most appropriate. Will the Minister, with all diligence, petition Her Majesty the Queen for an appropriate award to the Northern Ireland Fire Service?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: I refer the Member to my statement that the Executive have taken a decision that a corporate award by the Assembly would be appropriate. They have also agreed that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minster should investigate whether a state award is achievable or suitable. It would not be appropriate for me to move ahead outside the Executive’s decision.

Social Security and Child Support Regulations

Mr Maurice Morrow: That this Assembly approves the Social Security and Child Support (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2000.
The Regulations were laid before the Assembly on 22 June 2000. This is the first time that I have sought the approval of the Assembly for Regulations relating to social security, pensions and child support. It may be helpful if I begin with an explanation of why the confirmatory procedure — the strongest form of Assembly control over Regulations — is being used.
Parity between Great Britain and Northern Ireland means not only parity of content but parity of timing. The Great Britain Regulations to which the Northern Ireland Regulations correspond will have been approved by Parliament shortly before they were made, so it is not possible for the Assembly to approve the Northern Ireland Regulations and match the operative date. The use of the confirmatory procedure, under which the Regulations are made and come into operation but must be approved by the Assembly within six months of the operative date, enables us to do this.
I do not propose to speak on every amendment made by the Social Security and Child Support (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2000, but I shall, of course, be happy to respond to Members’ questions. The Regulations correspond to Regulations for Great Britain made by the Secretary of State for Social Security following their approval by the House of Commons on 8 June and the House of Lords on 14 June. Therefore, they are a parity measure.
Principally, these Regulations amend the Social Security and Child Support (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1999, which I shall refer to as the decisions and appeals Regulations. They also amend Regulations on claims and payments, child support and industrial injuries. The decisions and appeals Regulations were made under powers in the Social Security (Northern Ireland) Order 1998. That Order set up a new decision making and appeals system in social security and child support. The decisions and appeals Regulations provided the detailed framework for an improved decision-making and dispute-resolution system, a simplified appeals system and the introduction of a modern, accountable appeals service. The new system was implemented in relation to child support in June 1999, and over the period from July 1999 to November 1999 with regard to social security benefits.
The amendments to the decisions and appeals Regulations are purely technical and are intended to improve the service to claimants. They are based on the experience of the live running of the decision-making and appeals system and are all beneficial.
The Regulations can be broken down into three parts. The first tier deals with decision making, appeals and other matters. The changes being made to the first tier aim to secure more effective and efficient management of the new process. There are three key changes. First, there is a clearer definition of official error. The original definition caused confusion, and, more significantly, there was the possibility that claimants would be penalised where no penalty was intended. Secondly, changes are to be made to bridge payment gaps when the Department supersedes a decision on its own initiative. Thirdly, there is to be clarification of the effective date of a decision which replaces an earlier one made by a tribunal or a commissioner on disability and incapacity benefits.
The amendments relating to appeals, which affect the composition of tribunals, striking-out, decision notices and time limits are all aimed at approving the service for appellants by streamlining the administration of appeals.
The other amendments deal with the tidying-up of the decision-making process for industrial injury scheme benefits. They are designed to ensure that the decision- making and appeals principles are adhered to and to improve the administration of claims where the entitlement is dependent on the award of another benefit. The existing provisions can lead to delays in people getting their full entitlement. In future, provided people act within a defined time, payment will be made more promptly and automatically.
The new decision-making and appeals arrangements have already had a positive impact on the way in which the agencies and the appeals service handle disputes and appeals. However, there is always room for improvement. I am confident that the Regulations will help to bring about that improvement.

Mr Fred Cobain: The Social Development Committee considered this Statutory Rule along with the report from the Examiner of Statutory Rules at a meeting on 14 September. The Examiner drew the Committee’s attention to his concern about the Rule under Standing Order 41(4)(g). The Standing Order requires the Committee to report whether the Rule examined
"appears to have defects … or on any other ground which does not impinge on its merits or on the policy behind it."
This Statutory Rule contains some provisions that are subject to negative resolution and some that shall cease to have effect unless approved by resolution of the Assembly — that is, by confirmatory procedure. The Examiner thought that that could lead to procedural difficulties and that it should be avoided unless clearly contemplated by the enabling legislation.
In 1950, the Speaker of the House of Commons ruled that it was not appropriate to have both procedures in the same instrument. The Examiner recognised that, in the context, the enabling legislation in this case intended that these Regulations should be subject to the confirmatory procedure, but exposed some doubts about its clarity.
The Social Development Committee has no objections to the content of this rule and does not wish to delay it. Therefore, it recommends that the Assembly approve it. It asks, however, MrSpeaker, that you consider the general point raised by the Examiner and make a ruling. I have forwarded a copy of the Examiner’s full report to your Office, and I have placed a copy in the Library.

Mr Speaker: I will take account of those matters and will make a ruling as soon as I have considered them fully.

Ms Michelle Gildernew: Go raibh maith agat. I was interested to hear the Minister talking about improving the service and dealing with claims promptly and automatically. How efficient will that be, and will it get rid of the current huge backlog of cases? I have concerns that it will not improve the service in the way that we might like.

Mr Speaker: I have no further indications of Members wishing to speak, so I call the Minister, Mr Morrow, to wind up.

Mr Maurice Morrow: In response to the point made by the Chairman of the Social Development Committee, I want to say that I am aware of the report of the Examiner of Statutory Rules. I have considered his views on the inclusion in the same instrument of provisions subject to the confirmatory procedure and those subject to negative resolution. It is not clear from the reference in the report to the 1950 ruling by the Speaker of the House of Commons whether that was the House of Commons at Stormont or at Westminster. In any event, that was 1950 — we have moved on since then.
Prior to 1990, it was the practice to include Regulations subject to the confirmatory procedure in a separate instrument from those subject to negative resolution. That was consistent with the practice in Great Britain. However, the Social Security Act 1990 amended the legislation relating to parliamentary control of subordinate legislation to allow provisions subject to affirmative and negative resolution to be included in a single instrument, subject to affirmative resolution. That was during direct rule, and the Social Security (Northern Ireland) Order 1990 allowed for Northern Ireland to make provisions subject to negative resolution that could be combined with provisions subject to affirmative resolution and for those Regulations to be subject to the confirmatory procedure. Since 1990, all primary legislation concerning social security, pensions and child support has continued that practice.
The inclusion of the phrase
"whether alone or with other provisions (or regulations)"
in the provisions of an Act or Order in Council dealing with Assembly control is intended to allow for the inclusion in a single instrument of Regulations subject to the confirmatory procedure and those subject to negative resolution. Such an instrument is subject to the confirmatory procedure. That means that the reader can find the relevant provision in a single set of Regulations instead of two, and there is a financial saving. The cost of a single set of Regulations will always be less than the cost of two sets, which, added together, make the same provision.
As such Regulations in Northern Ireland are subject to the confirmatory procedure — the highest form of Assembly control for Regulations dealing with social security, pensions and child support — the Assembly’s control of the Regulations is not diminished; it is strengthened. That is a proper and effective way to process Regulations, and I recommend that it be allowed to continue. The backlog of claims will be reduced.

Mr Speaker: I note what the Minister has said about procedure, and I will examine his comments, as reported in Hansard, in my consideration of the question raised by the Chairperson of the Committee for Social Development.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved:
That this Assembly approves the Social Security and Child Support (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2000.

Social Security (Students Amendment) Regulations

Mr Maurice Morrow: That this Assembly approves the Social Security (Students Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2000.
I shall refer to these Regulations as the students Regulations. The students Regulations make provision for Northern Ireland and correspond to those made by the Secretary of State for Social Security for Great Britain, following approval by the House of Commons on 12July and the House of Lords on 19July. This is a parity measure.
The Regulations amend existing housing benefit, income support and jobseeker’s allowance legislation in three ways. First, they introduce new provisions for students who have recovered from illness or are former carers. In some cases, students who are ready to resume their studies may not be allowed to do so immediately by their educational establishment. Often, they have to wait until the start of the next academic year. In such circumstances those students who have recovered from an illness or who are former carers do not receive educational support and are not eligible for jobseeker’s allowance or housing benefit because they have not finished their full-time courses.
The Regulations provide that, subject to the normal rules, such students will be eligible to claim jobseeker’s allowance and, where appropriate, housing benefit. The period during which they will be able to claim benefit is from the date of recovery from illness, or the end of their caring duties, until the date when they are able to join their courses or the start of the next academic year, whichever is sooner. That positive support will help those individuals to help themselves.
Secondly, the Regulations tighten up the definition of full-time student for the purpose of housing benefit, income support and jobseeker’s allowance — the income-related benefits. It re-emphasises the existing policy that those benefits are not normally payable to students until they finally complete, abandon or are dismissed from their course.
Thirdly, they make technical amendments to provide a better alignment of definitions across all the income- related benefits. They make positive progress in maintaining the interface between social security and education maintenance. They will enable the "recovered ill" and "former carers" to claim jobseeker’s allowance and housing benefit until they are able to resume their studies.

Mr Fred Cobain: As with the previous Statutory Rule that we discussed, the Social Development Committee considered this rule along with a report from the Examiner of Statutory Rules at its meeting on 14September 2000. The comments that I made on the last motion apply equally to this Statutory Rule. I do not wish to reiterate what I have already said, Mr Speaker, except to ask again that you consider the general point raised by the Examiner.
What student groups did the Minister’s officials consult prior to the preparation of this Statutory Rule?

Ms Michelle Gildernew: Go raibh maith agat. I have some concerns about the regulations. I welcome the move to assess modular students at the time of their claim, as opposed to the first day of their course, but I believe that the restrictions on claiming income support or jobseeker’s allowance while registered on a part-time basis are too prohibitive. Students are not entitled to support from their education and library board as they are registered as part-time, yet they are not entitled to jobseeker’s allowance as they are classed as full-time for social security purposes. That will undoubtedly create another group of students who are excluded from any kind of financial support.
I am also concerned about the Social Security Advisory Committee’s recommendations. It pointed out that people in full-time education should not be deprived of the right to any guarantee of support if their studies are interrupted for valid reasons. Those reasons could be other than ill health and caring. Consideration could be given to people who have had to leave their courses because of pregnancy, bereavement or other reasons. I am also concerned about lone parents, who lose their entitlement to benefits as soon as the youngest child reaches16. The Social Security Advisory Committee recommended that entitlement to income support for lone parents should be extended while they are in full-time education. I also believe that there was not enough consultation with student groups such as NUS-USI. To what extent has consultation taken place?

Mr Maurice Morrow: I will clarify the position on consultation. The Social Security Advisory Committee fulfils a role for NorthernIreland similar to that for GreatBritain. It invites views from NorthernIreland when conducting consultation on the equivalent GreatBritain Regulations. The Committee states that corresponding NorthernIreland Regulations are to be made and takes into account views expressed by any NorthernIreland interests. I emphasise that the consultation process was carried out by the Social Security Advisory Committee, and I have no details about who was consulted. I will take a look at it again and come back to the Chairperson of the Committee about it. With regard to student requirements, the regulator’s advice is to keep the student in line with other recipients of income support.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved:
That this Assembly approves the Social Security (Students Amendment) Regulations (NorthernIreland) 2000.
The sitting was suspended at 12.25 pm.
On resuming (Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr McClelland] in the Chair) —

Oral Answers to Questions

Education

Minister / Executive Committee

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: 1. asked the Minister of Education if he will detail when he will next meet the Executive Committee, and what issues concerning his Department he intends to raise at that meeting.
(AQO 371/00)

Mr Martin McGuinness: I plan to attend the next meeting of the Executive Committee,  which is scheduled for Thursday 30 November. Under the ministerial code, I am unable to disclose the business of the Executive, and thus I am unable to answer any questions on issues to be raised at that meeting. However, I have discussed a wide range of education issues at previous Executive Committee meetings.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: Given that the Minister of Education is taking legal action against the First Minister, can we take it as read that he has absolutely no confidence in the First Minister, and does he agree that his costly actions have undermined any token of credibility contained in the Belfast Agreement?
Given his new-found fondness for legal action, will he be giving advice, encouragement and evidence to the Bloody Sunday inquiry? Also, given the fact that he had the responsibility of firing the first shots then, how will he take up his responsibilities as Minister of Education?

Mr Martin McGuinness: We have discussed the difficulties caused by the First Minister’s refusal to nominate me for the education sectoral meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council. In the press release after the Executive Committee meeting on 9 November, we said that there had been a comprehensive exchange of views about the questions of ministerial nominations to the North/South Ministerial Council. That is where the matter sits at the moment. The issue of what is happening in the court proceedings is in the public domain. People will be familiar with the course of action that the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and I have taken.

Mr John Kelly: Will the Minister also bring to the attention of the Executive the use of inflammatory language by Assembly Members — for example, Mr McCrea — which could lead to —

Mr Donovan McClelland: I remind the Member that supplementary questions must relate to the question on the Order Paper.

Mr John Kelly: A LeasCheann Comhairle, my question relates to the Executive and the Minister’s responsibility.

Mr Donovan McClelland: I am ruling it out of order.

Rural Schools

Mr Sammy Wilson: 2. asked the Minister of Education what steps he intends to take to ensure that he meets the Programme for Government commitment to protect schools in rural areas.
(AQO 360/00)

Mr Martin McGuinness: It is very important that rural communities have access to a network of strong local schools with the necessary accommodation, equipment and range of teaching experience to deliver a broad and balanced curriculum. High priority will continue to be given to the replacement of rural schools that have seriously sub-standard accommodation.
As to school rationalisation, when development proposals are submitted to the Department for approval, I will want to be satisfied that all alternative options have been examined in consultation with parents in the community before taking a decision on any of those matters.
I also intend to publish a consultation document early in the new year that will set out proposals for a new common formula for use in the allocation of resources for all schools, including small schools. The document will include proposals for the definition of a small school for funding purposes, the value of the funding supplement that should be allocated, and the range of pupils that should be included in the pupil count.

Mr Sammy Wilson: Can the Minister assure us that where there are existing small schools in rural areas, or where there are demands for new schools in rural areas to maintain rural communities, the same criterion will be applied to them as he proposes to apply to Irish language schools? If there is an intake of 12, will he be prepared to fund such schools, or are we going to see a difference in the way that the Minister deals with controlled schools, as opposed to the way that he deals with Irish language schools?

Mr Martin McGuinness: There are over 400 rural primary schools with fewer pupils than the levels envisaged in the proposed new viability criteria for Irish-medium and integrated schools. In cases in which we are considering building new schools in rural areas, we already use a minimum enrolment of 85 pupils as our basic criterion. My proposals for Irish-medium and integrated schools will therefore merely provide them with equality of treatment for the first time.

Mr Gerry McHugh: A LeasCheann Comhairle, will the Minister give an assurance about funding for small schools, particularly in rural areas? Lack of funding puts pressure on teacher numbers in those schools, taking into account the issue of rurality and the viability figures that he has just mentioned.

Mr Martin McGuinness: Very small schools often have to rely to an unreasonable degree on the commitment and dedication of a small number of teachers. That cannot provide the same quality of educational experience for pupils as is available in larger schools. Such schools can require additional support over a sustained period to help minimise any educational disadvantages to their pupils. A consultation document will be issued early in the new year setting out proposals for a new common formula to be used in the allocation of resources to all schools, including small schools. It will give us an opportunity to deal with some of the issues raised by the Member.
I would also like to inform the Assembly that there have been attacks on small schools in the past two weeks — one in Greenlough, near Portglenone in County Antrim, and another on the Comhaltas Ghaelscoil Dhál Riada in north Antrim, which I visited this morning. It was sad to see children in their school uniform unable to attend their school because someone thought a cause — whatever that cause was — could be served by the burning of a school. It is incumbent upon everybody in the Assembly, particularly elected representatives and leading citizens in the north Antrim area, to make it clear to the people involved in such arson attacks — whether on Irish- language schools, Irish cultural establishments, Orange halls or church property — that such behaviour is absolutely unacceptable .

Education Administration

Mr Ken Robinson: 3. asked the Minister of Education if he intends to review the current structure of education administration as set out in the draft Programme for Government.
(AQO 381/00)

Mr Martin McGuinness: My Department intends to participate fully in the planned review of public administration which will be taken forward by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. It will be for the Executive Committee to determine the scope and nature of the review in due course.

Mr Ken Robinson: Does the Minister agree that, given the ever-growing segmentation of our educational system, there is an urgent need to review the structure of boards of governors in all types of schools in the interests of transparency and equity and to ensure that all sectors of society have confidence in the structures? Does he also agree that, given the ever-increasing complexity of their task and the severe demands upon their time, school governors should in future receive an attendance allowance similar to that which local councillors formerly received?

Mr Martin McGuinness: Much of that will depend on the nature of the review, the terms of reference and what the Executive agree as the best way forward.
Obviously, other Departments have a direct interest in educational issues and structures — the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure has a particular interest in library services — so the Department of Education cannot act unilaterally. Undoubtedly, as we stated in the Programme for Government, there is consensus on the need for a wide-ranging review of local government. When the Executive decide on the terms of reference for that review, we will deal with the issues relating to the existing bodies in order to improve our education services.
I have not yet given any consideration to payments for school governors. If people wish to make a case, we will consider it within the context of a wide-ranging review.

Mr Danny Kennedy: Will the Minister tell us exactly when the review will take place? Will it be a wide-ranging review, and will it cover all educational partners, including bodies such as the education and library boards, the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment and the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools? Given that it is in the Programme for Government and that each ministerial Department will be charged to bring forward its review proposals, can the Minister state when he will do so?

Mr Martin McGuinness: It is a matter for the Executive Committee as to when the review will take place, although I believe that we will come back to the issue before Christmas. I cannot decide that on my own. The review, when it is announced, will have to be wide-ranging. We should consider all the bodies within education, and we should aim to improve our education system in order to direct services straight into the classroom.
We must also recognise that this issue will create uneasiness and difficulty for many of those involved, because change is difficult for some people. From the educational perspective, we want a wide-ranging review in order to establish how we can enhance the services that we provide.

Business and Entrepreneurship: Teaching in Schools

Mr Sean Neeson: 4. asked the Minister of Education what plans he has to introduce the teaching of business and entrepreneurship in schools.
(AQO 357/

Mr Martin McGuinness: The current post-primary curriculum includes the statutory cross-curricular theme of economic awareness. One of the objectives of the theme is to provide pupils with first-hand experience of commerce and industry. The CCEA has embarked on a review of curriculum provisions, with a view to meeting the educational needs of young people in the new millennium. As part of that review, it is proposed to provide a specific programme for employability as a statutory entitlement for all young people in post-primary schools. There has been widespread consultation with employers to ensure that their needs are taken into account in the revised curriculum.

Mr Sean Neeson: I am pleased that the review is taking place. Does the Minister recognise the importance of small businesses to the Northern Ireland economy and, hence, the importance of the development of business and entrepreneurial skills? Does he also recognise that that is even more important as we move away from the grant culture? Will he consider what steps his Department can take to get more women involved in business in Northern Ireland?

Mr Martin McGuinness: Links between business and education are vitally important. In the context of the review of the curriculum, all the matters that the Member raised will be seriously addressed. We are working closely with bodies such as Young Enterprise, the Northern Ireland Science and Technology Regional Organisation, and Industry Matters. Those bodies offer a wide range of programmes linking schools with business. Such programmes are of great benefit to pupils and teachers and undoubtedly deepen their understanding of the world of business.
Business education partnerships play an important role in developing local partnerships and provide a mechanism whereby schools can make themselves aware of the range and nature of businesses in their locality. They make employers aware of their role in preparing pupils for life after school and maximise the input from employers in such work.
The number of women in business is an important issue. It is a matter for us but also for trade and industry and for the Department of Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment. People are focused on the importance of the subject. Recently, I was involved in the presentation of an ‘Irish Times’ award at the Royal Irish Academy in Dublin, at which three pupils from the North swept the board in a chemistry competition. Two of the winners were from my constituency, and all of them were female, which was an added bonus. It is important that we interest everybody, male and female, in this matter.

Mr John Dallat: I welcome the Minister’s reference to Young Enterprise. Will the Minister ensure that access to that organisation is available across Northern Ireland? Furthermore, will he give special encouragement to schools to come together from different backgrounds, particularly from North and South, to discuss business enterprise?

Mr Martin McGuinness: Organisations such as Young Enterprise provide an important range of programmes that link schools with business. It is important that we continue to encourage people — not just in schools, but in industry and business — to recognise the importance of business education partnerships. That battle has been won. Every school that I visit — even primary schools — shows an increasing awareness of the need to go down that route.
It is also important that we continue to build our links with other parts of this island. Schools should maintain contact with schools in other parts of the island so that they can learn from their different experiences. Everybody agrees that education played a major role in the growth of the "Celtic tiger" economy in the South. We have a lot to learn. I am convinced that we will continue to build on those relationships.
It is also important that we continue to build relationships across the community here in the North. It gives me particular pleasure to inform the Assembly that schools everywhere are recognising the need to bridge the community divide. They are doing that very successfully.

Mr Sammy Wilson: Given the obvious expertise that the Minister’s party has on such issues, will the programme include modules on extortion, racketeering and the black economy?

Mr Donovan McClelland: That is out of order.

Capital Developments: Economic Appraisal

Mr Eddie McGrady: 5. asked the Minister of Education if he will outline the number of economic appraisals currently being undertaken by his Department in respect of capital developments, and those planned for the next financial year.
(AQO 351/00)

Mr Martin McGuinness: The Department of Education carries out economic appraisals directly on behalf of the maintained, voluntary grammar, integrated and Irish- medium sectors. The Department is currently working on 42 appraisals in those sectors. It also considers and approves appraisals carried out by education and library boards, and there are 38 of those at present. Work on some of the appraisals will continue through to the next financial year, when further new appraisals will be added to the programme.

Mr Eddie McGrady: I thank the Minister for his reply to my question and his reply to question 2 indicating that next year there will be a new allocation formula for assessment. Will he address the problem of Moneydarragh Primary School at Annalong? He is aware that that excellent school, with an increasing roll, has been long starved of funding and has not yet received any favourable response from the Department. He is also aware that a decision must be made quickly, because of local land circumstances. At another level, his Department has already accepted the need, as a matter of some urgency, for an extension to and refurbishment of the Assumption Grammar School in Ballynahinch. Can that also be given some priority? Neither of those schemes can afford to wait until the review process next year, however welcome that is.

Mr Martin McGuinness: The Department’s appraisal work programme for the current financial year is fully committed. It will, however, consider the inclusion of the Moneydarragh Primary School project in its programme of appraisals for 2001-02, depending on other competing priorities.
I understand the case made by Mr McGrady in relation to Assumption Grammar School, but we all know that throughout the North there are many competing priorities for the schools capital building programme. We will certainly consider Assumption Grammar School in the school capital building programme next year, but that will obviously depend on the resources available.
If people have been listening to the radio and watching the television news recently, they will know that there are many demands on our finances for the school capital building programme throughout the North. When a decision is taken, it will be solely on the basis of educational need, but with a view towards fitting in as many urgent cases as we can. Since the establishment of the Executive, my views on the poor state of our school stock and the need to improve it have gone on record. People know the quantity of money that is required to do that. We can do only a certain amount in any given year, but early next year we will announce the school capital building programme, and we will attempt to facilitate as many people as possible in the light of the limited resources available to us.

Citizenship: Teaching In Schools

6

Mr Kieran McCarthy: asked the Minister of Education what plans he has to introduce the teaching of citizenship in schools.
(AQO 356/00)

Mr Martin McGuinness: I am aware of the importance of citizenship education for our young people. The Council for the Curriculum, Examination and Assessment (CCEA) is currently undertaking a review of the curriculum here, taking into account the changing needs of pupils, society and the economy in the new millennium. The council has highlighted the issue of citizenship education as part of this review and has been given approval to begin development work on a programme covering education for democracy and citizenship. It is proposed that that programme will focus on years 8 to 10, and it will cover diversity and interdependence, including community identity, conflict and reconciliation, and social and civic responsibilities. It will also deal with the issue of equality and justice, including human rights, inclusion and sustainable development, democracy and active participation.

Mr Kieran McCarthy: As we live in an era of citizens’ rights, does the Minister agree that young people should be taught at an early age that respect for law, justice and democracy — among other things — are fundamental elements of decent living? Does he agree that society as a whole would benefit from such an addition to the curriculum?

Mr Martin McGuinness: I agree that our young people would benefit from a comprehensive approach to the issue of citizenship and to the effective provision of processes to enable young people to appreciate their environment. The most important thing of all is the valuable contribution that they have to make to the community. I have often said that our most valuable resource is our children. There is no doubt about that. We have a responsibility to provide the best and most wide-ranging education that we can.
As I said in response to an earlier question, our young people are tremendous. The more that I visit schools and meet young people from right across the community, the more it becomes clear that young people appreciate the transformation that our society has undergone recently. They appreciate the Good Friday Agreement and understand the challenges that it poses, not just for politicians, but for themselves. They have risen to that challenge and accepted that the new way forward is for them. The more that we encourage that in the school curriculum, the greater the benefits will be for all of us in the longer term. That is why the review of the curriculum is so important.

Ms Patricia Lewsley: I welcome the recommendation of the CCEA to include the issue of citizenship in the new curriculum. How will that be delivered, and what type of training and funding will be put in to ensure that teachers will not be put under any more pressure than they are already?

Mr Martin McGuinness: The issue of how teachers deal with the considerable change caused by new measures that may be put in place as a result of the review is important. I am conscious of the need for teachers to receive appropriate training that will assist them in preparing for the introduction of the revised curriculum. The CCEA and the curriculum advisory and support services of the education and library boards have a responsibility for the provision of in-service training and are in discussion with my Department on how to plan for and meet those training needs. It is important that we manage all such matters in a way conducive to making life as easy as possible for teachers, who are presently under great strain.

Mr Edwin Poots: One of the rules for good citizens is the upholding of law and order. Will the Minister of Education call on school leavers to join the Police Service of Northern Ireland as part of the practice of good citizenship?

Mr Martin McGuinness: No one in the House will be under any illusion as to where I stand on the matter. I do not want to go into a debate on the issue, but it is important to point out that I accept absolutely that we need a new beginning to policing in this part of Ireland. We need a policing service to which all in the community can give its allegiance. The jury has sat on that — [Interruption]

Mr Donovan McClelland: Minister, those matters are outside your responsibility.

Information and Communication Technology (Primary Schools)

Mr David Ford: 7. asked the Minister of Education if he will detail his plans on the installation of information and communication technology in primary schools.
(AQO359/00)

Mr Martin McGuinness: My Department’s aim is to strengthen information and communication technology provision in all schools by procuring a managed service to meet their infrastructure, curricular and administrative needs. Priority will be given to primary schools.

Mr David Ford: Does the Minister agree that too much effort in that area tends to depend upon voluntary activities — for example, the parent/teacher associations? Is it not the responsibility of his Department to even out the playing field between schools from different backgrounds?

Mr Martin McGuinness: The Assembly is aware that we live in a changing world. We must adapt and change in order to meet the needs of that world, particularly those of our young people. That poses all sorts of challenges for us. At the moment, important negotiations are taking place on Classroom 2000. We are trying to prepare for the future. It is, of course, an issue that has wide-ranging implications for young people, the educational system and teachers. We are trying to face up to all of those difficult challenges in order to provide the best possible education for our children.

Mr Donovan McClelland: The time is up. We must move on.

Mr Derek Hussey: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I noticed during answers that the Minister habitually repeats the question. Is that not a waste of time?

Mr Donovan McClelland: That is not a point of order.

Health, Social services and public safety

Mr Donovan McClelland: Question11, standing in the name of MsMonicaMcWilliams, has been transferred to the Department for Social Development, which will provide a written reply.

Intensive Care Beds (Greater Belfast)

Mrs Eileen Bell: 1. asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety if she will outline her plans for the provision of intensive care beds in the Greater Belfast area; and if she will make a statement.
(AQO367/00)

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Tá méadú ar an dianchúraim de réir an aithbhreithnithe a rinne an Príomh-Oifigeach Míochaine ar mo shon i bhfianaise na mbrúnna a cuireadh ar sheirbhísí ospidéal an geimhreadh seo caite. Is é an chiall atá leis seo i mBéal Feirste go mbeidh trí leaba dhianchúraim phéidiatraiceacha bhreise ann sa Ghrúpa Ríoga Ospidéal agus dhá leaba dhianchúram bhreise in Ospidéal Uladh.
Táthar ag méadú soláthar cúraim ardspleáchais le cur leis na seirbhísí dianchúraim sin. Sa Ghrúpa Ríoga, áit nach bhfuil leapacha ardspleáchais faoi láthair, cuirfear cúig cinn ar fáil ar 1 Nollaig. In Ospidéal na Cathrach, áit a bhfuil dhá leaba ardspleáchais, méadófar an líon go dtí sé cinn ón 1 Nollaig fosta. Agus in Ospidéal Uladh, áit nach raibh soláthar cúraim ardspleáchais ann go dtí seo, tá trí leaba ardspleáchais ann ó 1 Samhain.
Levels of intensive care provision are being expanded in line with the review carried out for me by the Chief Medical Officer, in the light of pressures on hospital services last winter. In Belfast, that expansion means an increase of three paediatric intensive care beds at the Royal Group of Hospitals and two intensive care beds at the Ulster Hospital. To complement those intensive care services, high-dependency provision is also being increased. At the Royal Group of Hospitals, where there are no high-dependency beds at present, five will come on stream on 1December. The Belfast City Hospital Trust’s existing complement of two high-dependency beds is being increased to six, again from 1December, and the Ulster Hospital, which had no high-dependency provision, has had three high-dependency beds since 1November.

Mrs Eileen Bell: I am pleased with the answer. Knowing the situation at the Ulster Hospital, I ask the Minister whether she agrees that the crisis will not start on 1December but it is happening now. I hope that the necessary measures will be put in place now. As well as high-dependency beds, adequate staff are required. As the Minister may know, well-trained Filipino nurses are working in the Ulster Hospital. Although we congratulate them, we would like to be in a situation where that was not necessary.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: It is clear that the situation has been building up for some time. As I have stated on more than one occasion, I addressed that issue immediately upon coming into office last year. I called for two reviews at that time, the outworking of which we see as part of the response to today’s question.
I agree that it is a question not merely of availability of beds, but of staff. Boards and trusts have been working hard to ensure that additional staff, particularly nursing staff, are available. In the short term, boards have put in place a Return to Practice programme under which more than 100 additional nursing staff will be available. For the longer-term, an additional 100 nurse training places have been commissioned for each of the next threeyears.

Dr Joe Hendron: A number of people who were severely injured in the Omagh bomb were at Stormont last week, along with women who had had breast cancer and required breast reconstruction. My question concerns the surgeon, Mr Khalid Khan, on whom those people have depended and continue to depend so much. He has been at the Royal Victoria Hospital for the past two years, where he has been fighting a lone battle, depending to some extent on substandard equipment, but he has not had a permanent contract. Will the Minister give her total support to the Royal Hospitals Trust in giving Mr Khalid Khan, to whom I was speaking earlier today, a permanent and realistic contract so that he can continue to serve all the people of the four board areas in Northern Ireland?

Mr Donovan McClelland: I am not sure that that point was directly related to the question.

Dr Joe Hendron: Acute beds, acute burns.

Mr Donovan McClelland: You are stretching it a bit.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Since the problems with the service emerged, the Royal Hospitals Trust has been working to resolve issues relating to the supply of equipment to the unit. The trust has also been in urgent discussions with the eastern board and the ulster hospital trust to enhance links between the burns unit and other plastic services. I appreciate the vital service that Mr Khan has given, and I understand that he has been in close discussions with Dr Ian Carson, the Royal’s medical director. I am cautiously hopeful that concerns about the future development of the service can be addressed.
I have asked my officials to keep in contact with Dr Carson and to keep me informed of developments. I hope that these problems can be resolved quickly so that services can be maintained and patients can continue to get the treatment that they need — [Interruption]

Mr Donovan McClelland: Order.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: It is difficult to answer against this level of background babble, but I will attempt to do so.
I will do everything in my power as Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to ensure that that service and others are delivered to the highest possible standards.

Mr John Kelly: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Can the Minister repeat her assurance that last year’s problems with the recruitment of support staff to avert the winter pressures will not recur this year?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: I refer the Member to Ms Bell’s question on nursing staff. Boards and trusts are doing everything possible, and they have taken considerable measures to ensure that nursing staff, in particular, will be available this winter.
The Return to Practice programme has been developed. Representatives have gone out, on roadshows to ensure that people will take part in the Return to Practice programme, and 100 additional nursing staff have been recruited as a result of that considerable work. I previously outlined steps that my Department has taken to ensure that 100 nurse training places each year, over the next three years, will be put in place.

South Tyrone Hospital and Craigavon Area Hospital (Winter Pressure)

Mrs Joan Carson: 2. asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety if it is her intention to use South Tyrone Hospital this winter to ease pressure on Craigavon Area Hospital.
(AQO 372/00)

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Tá Bord Sláinte agus Seirbhísí Sóisialta an Deiscirt i ndiaidh sé leaba bhreise a choimisiúnú i dTeach Loane, aonad seanliachta in Ospidéal Dheisceart Thír Eoghain. De bharr na leapacha sin beidh sé ar chumas Ospidéal Cheantar Craigavon othair, nach bhfuil tuilleadh cóireála de dhíth orthu mar othair chónaitheacha ach nach ndearnadh measúnú iomlán go fóill ar a riachtanais chúraim pobail, a scaoileadh amach níos luaithe.
The Southern Health and Social Services Board has commissioned an additional six beds in Loane House, a geriatric unit on the South Tyrone Hospital site. Those beds will allow the earlier discharge from Craigavon Area Hospital of patients who no longer require hospital in-patient treatment but whose community care needs have not yet been fully assessed.

Mrs Joan Carson: The people of south Tyrone will find that a strange reply. Last year, we were told that Craigavon Area Hospital could cope with the workload previously dealt with by South Tyrone Hospital, and it came as some surprise that all our beds were used. It is interesting to find that we only have six down this year. I ask the Minister to assure to the Assembly and the people in south Tyrone that she will re-examine the current status of the services that have been temporarily transferred see if they can be reinstated, rather than just to provide the six beds that she spoke about.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Temporary transfer was made for specific reasons, and those reasons have not changed. Specific measures have been put in place in Craigavon to tackle winter pressures. The capacity of the intensive care and high dependency unit at Craigavon Area Hospital is being expanded. There are currently four intensive care beds and two high dependency beds in the unit, and arrangements are being made to increase that provision by 50%, to six intensive care and three high dependency beds. Dedicated patient transport vehicles will also speed up hospital transfers and discharges.
Several strong measures have been taken. Boards and trusts have been working hard to ensure that contingency arrangements are made for this winter. With regard to the long-term future of the South Tyrone Hospital, I have made it clear that no decisions will be taken until the independent review group chaired by Maurice Hayes has reported.

Mr Francie Molloy: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. First of all, the Minister will remember that she instructed John Templeton, the chief executive of Craigavon Area Hospital, to rebalance services between the Craigavon and South Tyrone hospitals. At present, private clinics such as the Ulster Clinic are being used and beds are being transferred from Craigavon to them. Can the Minister tell us the cost to the Health Service of that? Why are the new theatres in South Tyrone Hospital not being used for that very purpose? I am certain that they are just as well equipped as the Ulster Clinic, or any other private clinic.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Some of the measures that were outlined at that time, for the responsibilities that Craigavon Area Hospital will take on, will be implemented only from 1December. However, I must make it clear that the Department has been in contact with the board and has emphasised that it wishes to see a rebalancing of services between the two hospitals.
With reference to the question about the use of private facilities, around 57 patients waiting for surgical procedures have been identified for possible treatment by the board at the Ulster Independent Clinic. The board has also made it clear that it considered alternatives to the Ulster Independent Clinic. Those were fully explored, and the board is satisfied that there was no realistic alternative at the South Tyrone Hospital or elsewhere. My Department and I expect all reasonable potential options for treating patients in health and personal social services facilities to be tested first. From conversations that officials have had with the board, I understand that the main factor preventing the use of the South Tyrone Hospital for those 57 patients has been the need for overnight clinical cover for recovering patients.
I understand that a range of treatments is still being negotiated with alternative providers, including the private sector, and that the board expects to obtain a cost-effective package for those procedures that will represent good value for money for the patient and the Department.

Nurses (D Grade)

Mr Edwin Poots: 3. asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety if she will detail the percentage of nurses employed at D grade in Northern Ireland and what is the comparable figure for the rest of the United Kingdom.
(AQO 354/00)

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Is é 37·5% an céatadán d’altraí a bhfuil poist ghrád D acu anseo; 24·2% an céatadán i Sasana; agus 28·4% in Albain.
The percentage of qualified nurses in D grade posts here is 37·5%; in England it is 24·2%; and in Scotland it is 28·4%. Information on grade D nurses employed in Wales is not available.

Mr Edwin Poots: It is evident from the answer that we are paying nurses on the cheap in Northern Ireland, with 13% more nurses at D grade than in England. It is clear that that is one reason why so many nurses are leaving.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Is there a question in there, Mr Poots?

Mr Edwin Poots: Yes, there is. It is clear that that is one of the main reasons for the nursing crisis and for our having to import nurses from all over the world. What will the Minister do to ensure that nurses are rewarded fairly for the work that they do?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: The Member has obviously not read the front pages of the English newspapers, which tell us of the grave shortages of nurses throughout that country, and which slightly belie the point he appears to be trying to make. The grading of any nursing post depends on the duties of the post; length of service, experience and qualifications are not in the agreed criteria. Therefore, no direct comparison can be made between the numbers of grade D posts in different countries, as the number depends on the staffing requirements of individual organisations to deliver health care to service users.
The clinical grading system and pay for nurses and others working in the system have been addressed in the House several times. The four health boards, in partnership with employers and staff organisations, are currently developing proposals for a new pay system. It will offer staff a more attractive career with the potential for better progression, greater use of skills, improved status and higher earnings for those who contribute most to the service.
It is proposed that a job evaluation scheme will be used to evaluate every post in the Health Service, and pay will be awarded on the basis of a job’s worth in fair comparison with the worth of other jobs.

Minister / Executive Committee

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: 4. asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety if she will confirm when she will next meet with the Executive Committee and what issues she intends to bring to the Executive Committee for discussion.
(AQO 352/00)

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Beidh mé ag freastal ar an chéad chruinniú eile den Choiste Feidhmiúcháin ar an Déardaoin, 30 Samhain 2000. Mar atá leagtha síos sa chód aireachta, ní hé an cleachtas é labhairt go poiblí faoi mholtaí atá le cur faoi bhráid an Choiste Feidhmiúcháin nó atá á mbreithniú acu.
I will be attending the next meeting of the Executive, which is scheduled for Thursday 30 November. As stipulated in the ministerial code, it is not practice to make public comment on policy proposals that are to be brought to the Executive or are already under consideration.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: Given the fact that the Department, because of the Minister, wasted £3,290 on a meeting in Enniskillen that had supposedly been cancelled, to which the Chief Medical Officer for Northern Ireland and the permanent secretary of her Department were dragged along, can she reveal to the House how much departmental money she is going to waste on a legal action against the First Minister? Does she honestly believe that that is the best use of departmental money? Does she accept that her actions make a joke of any notion of collective responsibility? Does she accept that she is now the Minister for waste, the Minister for want and the Minister for the destruction of the Health Service? She is not the Minister for the Health Service, and that demonstrates Sinn Fein’s irresponsibility, rather than collective responsibility.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: The Member must be acutely embarrassed that the cost of the meeting is only half what he estimated it would be in his famous newspaper article — [Interruption].

Mr Donovan McClelland: Order.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: The Member made a similar gaffe over the cost of ministerial cars — his Minister had spent four times as much as some others. Maths is obviously not Ian Paisley Jnr’s strong point — [Interruption].

Mr Donovan McClelland: Order.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Given that he has not yet learned maths —

Mr John Kelly: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Mr Donovan McClelland: I do not take points of order during Question Time.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: In my response to written question 63/000, I outlined the real cost of the meeting, the travel expenses for officials and the costs associated with the launch of the Food Safety Promotion Board. I attended the meeting in order to fulfil my duties as Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. As a Minister, I am entitled to full administrative support. Therefore the salaries of those officials who accompanied me to the meeting were paid for fulfilling their duties.
That meeting produced significant benefits. There were four or five different components to it. At the same venue on the same day, there were public launches of the Food Safety Promotion Board and of the folic acid campaign. The latter informed the population of the specific benefits of taking folic acid when pregnant or when intending to become pregnant. The kind of publicity given to that vital health promotion campaign could not have been paid for. Having the different components on the same day, in the same venue, was highly cost-effective when compared to the cost of the legal action.
The North/South Ministerial Council is an integral part of the institutions that were established as a result of the Good Friday Agreement. Strand two paragraph 13 of the agreement states that the North/South Ministerial Council and the Assembly are
"mutually inter-dependent, and that one cannot successfully function without the other."
North/South work is also an integral part of the work of my Department and of my duties as Minister. The importance of challenging any attempt to ensure that I cannot carry out my duties is therefore self-evident. I had no option but to initiate legal proceedings and incur any costs in order to challenge the attempt to prevent me from doing that and prevent a major part of the agreement’s being put in place.

Rev Robert Coulter: Will the Minister advise the Executive Committee of discussions that she has had with health trusts about increasing the mileage allowances for district community nurses, taking into account the increasingly high cost of fuel? Will she undertake to discuss the matter with the Secretary of State for Health who has agreed an increase of up to 5p per mile in Great Britain?

Mr Donovan McClelland: That question is related to one further down the Order Paper.

Ms Michelle Gildernew: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Will the Minister raise with the Executive Committee the absence of Maurice Morrow from the ministerial group on drugs and the refusal of Gregory Campbell to report to the Executive on the cryptosporidium outbreak? Mr Campbell attempted to point the finger at the Ministers of the Environment and of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, but he has refused to meet the West Belfast MP and Sinn Féin Assembly Members from the area that is affected by the bug.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Order. Again, that is not related to the question.

Influenza Vaccination (Nurses and Doctors)

Mr Sean Neeson: 5. asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety if she will detail the percentage of nurses and doctors who have been vaccinated against influenza this year.
(AQO 361/00)

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Níl an t-eolas ar fáil san fhormáid inar iarradh é. I mbliana tairgeadh an vacsaín in éadan fliú do gach ball foirne de chuid na SSSP. Go dtí seo is é 6,100 líon iomlán na foirne a vacsaíníodh. Is é seo 11% d’fhoireann iomlán na SSSP. Sa dá bhordcheantar SSS dá bhfuil sonraí ar fáil vacsaíníodh 6·3% de na haltraí agus 9·9% de bhaill foirne míochaine. Leanfaidh na hiontaobhais de chláir vacsaínithe go dtí go luath i mí na Nollag.
The information is not available in the format requested. This year, the influenza vaccine was offered to all health and personal social services staff. The total number of staff vaccinated to date is 6,100, which represents 11% of all HPSS staff. In the two HSS boards where data is available, 6.3% of nurses and 9.9% of medical staff have been vaccinated. Vaccination programmes will continue in most trusts until early December.

Mr Sean Neeson: Following a recent report — not about Northern Ireland hospitals, but those in other parts of the UK — stating that many patients contract fatal illnesses while in hospital, surely those startling figures make it incumbent upon all hospital staff to have the vaccination.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: The influenza vaccine is effective in preventing influenza, but it will not have any impact on other causes of viral illness. It is hoped that there will be less staff absence as a result of flu. In any given winter, it is difficult to predict how much influenza and other viral illness there will be in the community. It is therefore difficult to predict the level of staff absence due to these conditions. Staff immunisation will reduce staff absence.
In Scotland, the uptake of vaccinations samong health care staff is not monitored centrally. Trusts in Wales have not been asked to immunise health workers and are not collecting the information centrally. In Northern Ireland, we have monitored the uptake of the vaccine, and the boards and trusts organised the influenza vaccination programme for staff. All HPSS staff were notified of the vaccination programmes by several different measures, including advertisements in hospital newsletters, personal invitations through clinic lists and payslips. We continue to monitor the uptake of the vaccine among staff, and boards and trusts have been asked to forward information on uptake levels and details of how their information and immunisation programmes are being organised and promoted. However, it is a voluntary measure. To ensure accessibility, immunisation clinics have been organised at a variety of locations and times. Some trusts have also organised special clinics for night staff.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Members of all parties should remember that private conversation when the Minister is speaking is very discourteous.

Mr John Kelly: On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Mr Donovan McClelland: I do not take points of order during Question Time.

Mr Alan McFarland: What has been the uptake for the influenza vaccine amongst the elderly, and is another epidemic expected this year?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: On the second part of that question, I refer the Member to my answer to Mr Neeson. The influenza vaccine has proved effective in preventing influenza, but it will have no impact on other causes of viral illness. It is an important part of our efforts to minimise winter pressures from influenza, but it is impossible to state exactly what will happen. They are precautionary measures. We are taking clear measures, and television advertisements and other campaigns were used to ensure uptake, because this year the vaccine is offered to the over-65s. The uptake is 57%.

Learning Disabilities

Mr Eddie McGrady: 7. asked the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety if she will outline what measures she will take to improve services for those with learning difficulties in the community; and if she will make a statement.
(AQO 349/00)

Ms Bairbre de Brún: De réir na spriocanna i straitéis réigiúnach na Roinne do 1997-2002 tá gach bord sláinte agus seirbhísí sóisialta agus gach iontaobhas pobail sláinte agus seirbhísí sóisialta ag forbairt réimse cuimsitheach de sheirbhísí tacaíochta do dhaoine a bhfuil míchumas foghlama orthu agus dá gcúramóirí. Is iad ár gcuspóirí foriomlána iad deireadh a chur le cúram fadtéarmach ospidéil agus líon na n-othar a ghlactar isteach a laghdú.
Each health and social services board and community trust has been developing a range of support services for those with a learning disability and their carers in line with the targets in the Department’s regional strategy for 1997-2002. The overall objectives are to end long-stay hospital care and reduce hospital admissions. Since 1997, the number of long-stay patients has decreased from 602 to 491. A regional review group chaired by the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety has been quantifying the need for community services to achieve those objectives and the resources necessary to fund them. That work is nearly complete.

Mr Eddie McGrady: I am sure that the Minister is aware that the Down Lisburn trust and the eastern health board assessed the requirements of services for those with learning disabilities. The requirements have been costed and the costs submitted to the Department. Does the Minister agree that the twin objectives of resettlement from Muckamore Abbey Hospital and community support should be granted equal importance? Does she also accept that resettlement and a decrease in the use of hospital-based services will not necessarily be achieved unless adequate resources are provided for the local community infrastructure?

Mr Donovan McClelland: The Minister must be brief in her reply.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: The eastern board’s statement has not been formally submitted to the Department, although the regional review group has considered it. It has been refined in the light of that consideration. Along with similar bids from the other boards, the statement will be incorporated in the group’s submission to the Department on future service provision and resources. I concur with those who see as essential the availability of appropriate community infrastructure and services for those transferred into the community from Muckamore Abbey Hospital. I emphasise that the move will not occur unless the appropriate community services are available to allow those people to be transferred.

Mr Derek Hussey: I would like to raise a point under Standing Order 19(5). Members will agree that the allocation of time is insufficient to allow questions to be answered when both the question and the answer are repeated. I ask that appropriate additional time be allocated to the Minister of Education and the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety following the completion of other scheduled business under Standing Order 10(3).

Mr Donovan McClelland: I will see that the matter is raised with the Business Committee tomorrow.

Mr John Kelly: I am concerned at the verbal abuse directed at the Minister during Question Time. Such abuse is unacceptable in the Chamber. It is no wonder that young people take an example from that and go out to burn Catholic schools and Irish schools. It is unacceptable — [Interruption].

Mr Donovan McClelland: Order.

Finance and personnel

Barnett Formula

Mr David Ford: 1. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel if he will detail the discussions he has had with his counterparts in Scotland and Wales in relation to the impact of the Barnett Formula.
(AQO/365/00)

Mr Mark Durkan: I met the Finance Secretary of the National Assembly for Wales in July. We agreed that there is common interest between Northern Ireland and Wales and that there could be scope for working together in the future to press for adjustments to funding arrangements. During the spending review process, my officials had a series of meetings with their counterparts in Scotland and Wales.

Mr David Ford: I thank the Minister for his response and welcome the fact that there has been at least some discussion. Does he agree that the Barnett formula is opaque and out of date and that it fails to meet either future or present needs? Does he also agree that the Barnett formula operates with uncertainty, as in the recent DETR initiative on transport funding?
Given that level of discrimination, is it not important that the Minister consult further with both Scotland and Wales? I understand that both parties in each of those Governments are now fully in favour of revising the Barnett formula to produce something more equitable to every region of the United Kingdom.

Mr Mark Durkan: I agree with much of the Member’s criticism of the Barnett formula, which does not represent a fair or proper basis for allocations across the regions in the context of devolution. We have registered that point and shall continue to do so. However, to have any hope of success, we must build up a strong case before the next spending review. The issue is not so much whether we can come up with valid and well-founded criticisms of the Barnett formula as whether we can produce a cogent and coherent alternative that the various regions, as well as the United Kingdom Treasury, would be prepared to adopt. To that end, we shall continue to explore all the issues with our counterparts to come up with a more equitable basis for future allocations.

Ms Patricia Lewsley: How much success have the Minister’s representatives on the group working on the Barnett formula had?

Mr Mark Durkan: In the context of the spending review announcements made in July, the First Minister, the Deputy First Minister and I had some success in making representations for an improvement to the allocation that Northern Ireland received under the Barnett formula. We improved our treatment of abatement of VAT in spending programmes. We also ensured that spending on the London underground would be included in the formula for the first time. Those changes were worth some £40 million extra in each of the three years of the spending review.
On the basis of further representations made subsequent to the spending review announcement, the Treasury also agreed to provide additional common agricultural policy funding for modulation payments, amounting to £3 million, £4 million and £4·5 million respectively in the three years of the spending review.

Civil Service: Decentralisation

Mr Eddie McGrady: 2. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel if he will outline the progress to date on the decentralisation of Civil Service accommodation to rural areas.
(AQO 350/00)

Mr Mark Durkan: I intend to examine the scope for the decentralisation of Civil Service jobs in line with the commitments made in the draft Programme for Government and in the context of an accommodation review. The review will start as soon as possible after the receipt of an updated database of office accommodation commissioned from specialist consultants. The current target for completing the review, as set out in the Programme for Government, is June 2001. Pending the outcome, opportunities for relocation will be considered as they arise.

Mr Eddie McGrady: I thank the Minister for his reply, which somewhat subverted my supplementary question. I am glad to hear that the office accommodation audit to which he referred will be completed by the middle of next year. In coming to his conclusions on decentralisation, will the Minister take on board the deficit of such jobs in many rural areas and the particular requirement to address social need? Following publication of the Minister’s report in June 2001, such matters will need to be addressed urgently.

Mr Mark Durkan: I recognise the valuable contribution that Civil Service jobs make to many locations. We shall take a range of factors into account, including the number of Civil Service jobs in an area as a proportion of the local workforce, new TSN indicators, the regional planning strategy, the effect on equality of opportunity and, not least, service delivery and business efficiency and, of course, cost. In trying to balance all those factors, we want the region as a whole and, in particular, the various locations within it, to benefit. We also want to ensure that we continue to enhance the quality and effectiveness of public services.

Mr Ken Robinson: Does the Minister agree that Newtownabbey, despite being the fourth-largest borough in Northern Ireland, is under-provided with Civil Service jobs and has suffered from a recent loss of Civil Service accommodation?
Newtownabbey incorporates a large rural hinterland, and farmers in that area are to be congratulated on forming the highly successful Ollardale co-operative. Given that worthy example of self-help, will the Minister undertake to look frequently and favourably at Newtownabbey as a rural community likely to maximise the benefits that might flow from any decentralisation?

Mr Mark Durkan: It would be wrong of me to speculate about which areas might benefit as a result of whatever new policy might emerge from the review. Many areas have already been suggested as suitable locations for Civil Service jobs. We hope to bring forward a policy that will take account of a wide range of factors. I welcome the interest from a large number of areas in hosting Civil Service jobs and hope to see that interest reflected in the opportunities that might arise from the review.

Mr John Dallat: On the basis of the Minister’s personal experience in Derry, does he agree that the decentralisation of jobs is absolutely critical to the regeneration of all communities? Will he redress the disgraceful centralisation that took place during the dark years of direct rule?

Mr Mark Durkan: I need to be careful about saying too much about my own constituency. A further 20 Civil Service jobs in the pensions branch are to be located there, as a result of developments in the treatment of superannuation activities in some Departments.
Civil Service jobs make a significant contribution in any locality. I recognise the strong case that many Members make that the benefits should be evenly spread across Northern Ireland. I also recognise the difficulties with congestion in Belfast. We are trying to bring forward an overall review of accommodation strategy. We are bringing forward a policy that is about providing the Northern Ireland Civil Service with the accommodation that it needs for its business and management purposes. We will be glad to ensure that, as far as possible, the efficient supply and deployment of accommodation helps to achieve other benefits across the region.

Referral Dental Officer Position

Mr Billy Bell: 3. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel if he will detail in which newspapers advertisements were placed for the position of referral dental officer (job reference SB/85/00) in (a) English language text and (b) Irish language text, and what was the cost of each advertisement.
(AQO 373/00)

Mr James Leslie: 6. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel to detail how many applications for the position of referral dental officer (job reference SB/85/00) have been received by the Department in (a) the English language and (b) the Irish language.
(AQO 375/00)

Mr Mark Durkan: I will take questions 3 and 6 together.
The Recruitment Service, for which I am responsible, placed advertisements in English in the ‘Belfast Telegraph,’ the ‘News Letter,’ the ‘Irish News’ and the ‘British Dental Journal’. Excluding VAT, the costs were £955, £618, £477 and £1,113 respectively. I understand that the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety placed advertisements in Irish in a number of newspapers. It is for the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to answer any questions relating to advertisements placed by her Department. The Recruitment Service has received six applications for the post — all in English.

Mr Billy Bell: I thank the Minister for his reply in English. The advertising charge of £3,000 — the Minister did not give the Assembly any figures for the other advertisement — is exceptionally high, given that the position has a salary scale of £31,000 to £52,000. It is a deplorable waste.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Do you have a question? This is your opportunity to ask it.

Mr Billy Bell: Surely, I am also entitled to a preamble.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Of course.

Mr Billy Bell: Has the Minister any plans to discuss with his colleagues how such deplorable waste can be eliminated? I intended to ask a second question, but it has been said that all the replies to the advertisement were written in English.

Mr Mark Durkan: It is for each Department, not the Minister of Finance and Personnel, to decide what advertising is appropriate, according to the needs of the Department. The cost of advertising is significant, but if we did not advertise the posts — or if we varied the money to be spent on advertising according to salary scales — the level of equality of opportunity and open access to vacancies would be open to greater question. It is standard practice — and there is guidance on that — that advertisements be placed in a range of newspapers so that they will come to the notice of everyone who is eligible to apply.
The Recruitment Service has also recently launched a website that displays the details of every vacancy in the Civil Service, and I hope that it will be widely used. The site is useful, not just for people in the region, but for the many people who work elsewhere and who might have an interest in returning to work here. The service is accessible to people who cannot buy local newspapers.

Regional Rate

Mr Seamus Close: 4. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel if he will detail the equity of distribution of the regional rate among the population; and if he will make a statement.
(AQO 370/00)

Mrs Eileen Bell: 7. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel if the proposed 8% increase in the regional rate has been equality proofed.
(AQO 369/00)

Mr Mark Durkan: I will take questions 4 and 7 together.
The regional rate is levied uniformly at a standard rate in the pound across Northern Ireland. Its impact on households will depend on the net annual value ascribed to each property and on the economic circumstances of each household.
The existence of rate rebates, as part of the social security system, means that the impact is lessened for those in the lower income bands. In that sense, in taxation jargon, it becomes more progressive. It is recognised that the system can be made more progressive, and that will be considered in the proposed review of the rating system, as has already been signalled to the Assembly. The setting of the level of and increases in the regional rate is scheduled for equality impact assessment by the Department of Finance and Personnel’s draft equality scheme. That equality impact assessment is to be tied into the overall review of rating policy.

Mr Seamus Close: The Minister says that he hopes to make the tax more progressive. I would prefer it if he recognised that the tax is quite regressive. It does not take into account the ability to pay and it hits those on fixed incomes, such as pensioners.
In the light of the regressiveness and inequity of this tax, will the Minister assure the House that when he comes to reassess the Budget with his Executive colleagues, it will not be increased by the proposed 8%, thus ensuring that those who are less well off, whose position he tacitly recognises, will not be further crippled?

Mr Mark Durkan: I suggested that at a certain level the rates could be seen to be more progressive than at other levels, because of the facility provided through the social security system. I am not claiming that the rates system overall is a progressive tax. When rate rebates are taken into account, research shows that the rates become more progressive in the lower half of the income distribution and that they are proportional for middle incomes and regressive in the higher part of income distribution. We are trying to improve the fairness of the rate burden on Northern Ireland’s households. That is one reason for the rating review.
Recent research, based on the continuous household survey and the Robson index of deprivation at district council level, demonstrates a relationship between the degree of deprivation and the domestic regional rate burden per capita in district council areas and that the domestic regional rate burden per capita generally increases as the level of deprivation decreases. Therefore the picture is not as bad as the Member has painted it. That is not to say that there are no anomalies and inequities in the system that should be examined. In particular, I recognise the position of some older householders, especially if they are single occupants.

Mrs Eileen Bell: The Minister is obviously aware of the problems that rates cause for people on low incomes. Can he assure the House that the rating review will take account of equality impact assessment so that people will not be in the position that they are in at present? It is an unequal system. What is the present state of the rating review?

Mr Mark Durkan: I repeat what I said in the original answer. As part of the Department of Finance and Personnel’s draft equality scheme, a commitment has been made for an equality impact assessment on the setting of the rates. It is sensible to tie that work in with the broader rating review. Proposals on that review will be brought forward soon. We want to re-examine how revenue is taken from Northern Ireland’s population to support public expenditure requirements. It is right that we make a contribution towards those public expenditure needs.
We do not want a situation in which we seem to criticise the Barnett formula — as the Member’s Colleague did — or where we appear to call for the formula to be changed because we want more money from English taxpayers and, at the same time, say that extra money should not be raised through the rates from the local population. We cannot win both those arguments. A review is needed. The review will examine how money is raised and how any inequities in the present system might be relieved. The review must make sure that revenue is raised, as well as dealing with the problems of particular groups.

Mr Derek Hussey: I trust that the review will take some cognisance of the difficulties of town centre traders as opposed to those in developments on the edges of towns. I am concerned about the equity of the distribution of finances raised from the regional rate, given that, in the main, the increases were intended for infrastructural improvement.
I refer to the answer to Mr McGrady’s question about the decentralisation of Civil Service accommodation. There is a commitment to e-government in the Programme for Government. Therefore it is important that the infrastructure for e-government is in place throughout Northern Ireland. Will finance be made available for broadband infrastructural development throughout Northern Ireland?

Mr Mark Durkan: The Member’s supplementary question took the scenic route around the points that we passed on the way.
In the review, we are trying to ensure that we have a rates system that delivers money for public expenditure services and does so in a way that the ratepayers find fair. It is also important that the money be spent in ways that the people believe to be fair and equitable. That is a constant challenge in our resource and spending planning.
The Member will be aware that there are proposed Executive programme funds in the Budget. One of those funds relates to infrastructure and capital renewal. We also said in the draft Budget statement that telecommunications is an area that might be addressed or assisted.
The Member will also be aware that the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, SirRegEmpey, is sponsoring an information-age initiative and has made a commitment to the entire region in that regard.

Mr Sammy Wilson: Given the difficulties that the review of the rateable value caused for small businesses a couple of years ago, especially for shops on arterial routes, will the Minister bear in mind in this review the regressive effect of the rates system, especially on retail business?

Mr Mark Durkan: The review of rating policy and processes that we are talking about is separate from the non-domestic revaluation that I announced previously. That work is now being undertaken, but the results of the revaluation will not feed into rating bills until 2003.
We want to carry out a non-domestic revaluation now because we have learnt the lessons from the last one. Things had been left so long from the previous revaluation that there were considerable swings in the rateable valuation. Everybody affected at that time said that future revaluations should be regular and timely. We hope to do that.
People are already saying that some of the last revaluations have been overtaken by developments, not least the change in retail patterns. That is another argument in favour of a timely non-domestic revaluation.

Budget: Rural-Proofing

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: 5. asked the Minister of Finance and Personnel if he will confirm that the Budget has been rural-proofed.
(AQO 363/00)

Mr Mark Durkan: The allocations in the draft Budget are consistent with the strategic aims and priorities set out in the draft Programme for Government. One of the strands of the programme’s key priority of securing a competitive economy is to work to regenerate the rural economy, and that includes a commitment to the new process of rural-proofing.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: In reply to AQW 672/00, the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development informed me that there had not been a ministerial-led group established to proof all Government policies. Will the Minister campaign to ensure that that group is established soon? Anything else will make nonsense of any commitment to rural- proof the Budget or the Programme for Government.

Mr Mark Durkan: The Programme for Government contains a commitment to establish a ministerial-led group to proof all major Government policies and programmes in respect of their rural impact. All Ministers — myself no less than anybody else — are committed to that. I am glad that the Member is keen that measures proposed in the Programme for Government be implemented.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Members, including the Minister, should be brief.

Mr Joe Byrne: What resources were made available in the Budget, the October statement and the EU programme, specifically for agriculture and rural development initiatives?

Mr Mark Durkan: This year’s budget provided £164·2 million, the October statement saw a further £6·7 million allocated, and the EU Peace Programme provided £4·4 million. Therefore the total is £175·3million for the year. The Member will be aware that £190·9 million is projected in next year’s draft Budget and a further £9·6 million will come from Peace II. That will be £200·5 million — a 14·4% uplift.
(Madam Deputy Speaker [Ms Morrice] in the Chair)

Fire Service

Mr Jim Shannon: I beg to move
That this Assembly calls on the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety to make representations to the Secretary of State for a state award that will recognise the great sacrifice and commitment to duty of members of the Fire Service in Northern Ireland.
This is an opportunity to bring to the Assembly an issue that is important to many Members. We felt that we might have had the opportunity to bring the matter up a few weeks ago, but we were unable to do so. However, the opportunity has been granted today, and Members have a chance to voice support for the Fire Brigades Union, the Fire Brigade and those who work therein.
The motto of the Fire Service is "unitate fortior" — unity is our strength. It is appropriate and sums up the motion before us today. It was adopted in 1973 when the Belfast Fire Service and the Northern Ireland Fire Service amalgamated. The Fire Service has faced the worst evils that man could throw at it. Along with the RUC and the Army, the Fire Service has borne the brunt of the atrocities that occurred during 30 years of troubles. Members will recall some of the worst atrocities: the Remembrance Day service bomb blast in Enniskillen; the Droppin’ Well at Ballykelly; the Abercorn Restaurant; Bloody Friday in Oxford Street; La Mon House Hotel in Castlereagh; McGurk’s Bar; the Shankill Road; and Omagh. The loss of life at those terrible incidents was horrendous, and members of the Fire Service, along with others, scrambled through the rubble and debris to find anyone still alive. They were also there to give urgent medical attention and support to those still alive or close to death. That was life in the Fire Service.
Men and women from both sides of the community served all the people bearing the brunt of terrorist attacks, without thought for themselves. Nine members of the Fire Service were killed, and thousands more were injured as a result of dedication to their job and to their vocation. The injuries are not only physical; many members of the Fire Service have suffered from post- traumatic stress disorder, and many still suffer. That was first diagnosed after the Gulf War and the Falklands War, but you do not have to be in the Army, the Navy or the Air Force to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. Some Fire Service personnel are shadows of their former selves because of that disorder. Can you imagine the effect of carrying dead children out of a bomb site or attending to those who have sustained horrific burns, with many others blown to pieces? In some of the worst incidents, the only way to collect the bodies was with a shovel and a bag. That would have a serious effect on anyone’s mind. Many members of the Fire Service suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, with little or no prospect of getting better. We cannot, and should not, forget them. Today we have the opportunity to put things right.
Did the outrages end with the peace process and the agreement? The answer is "No". Statistics show that the Fire Service has attended just as many, if not more, civil disturbance incidents since 1996. The highest number of incidents took place in 1998. Those figures equal the worst of the 30years of the troubles. During that time of war and savage violence, the Fire Service carried out its work with true dedication and loyalty to the whole Province. Firefighters served everyone in Northern Ireland, right across the spectrum.
There are currently 2,000members of the Fire Service. Fifty-five per cent are full-time, and 45%are part-time. There are also many who have retired or who have had to give up service for medical reasons — for example, post-traumatic stress disorder. The Fire Service has given much, without the financial or manpower resources of fire services in other parts of the UnitedKingdom. Essex, which is only 30% of the size of NorthernIreland and has a smaller population, has a larger budget, more up-to-date fire equipment and more full-time firefighters than NorthernIreland and can call on the help of its neighbours, Sussex and Suffolk. In Northern Ireland, the Fire Service attended almost 10,000more incidents in one year than that in Essex. That illustrates the shortfall.
The Northern Ireland Fire Service has worked above and beyond the call of duty. It is totally committed to serving the whole community. It carried out its duties while it was under-resourced and sometimes undermanned. It gave best value in the past, gives it now and will continue to give it in the future. For those reasons, it is important for the Assembly to make representations to the Secretary of State for a state award.
In my discussions with the Fire Service, the Fire Authority, other Members and constituents, all have said to me that they want a state award that will reflect accurately the esteem in which the Fire Service is held. A corporate award, perhaps in the form of a stained-glass window in a public building or a monument in a public place, would also show recognition, but we want a state medal to reflect public opinion. We want to see a medal struck by royal warrant that could be worn on a tunic in special recognition of all that the Fire Service has done. The Secretary of State could make such an award under his delegated powers, and we urge him to do so.
The Fire Brigades Union and the Fire Authority are united in the belief that the correct way to show recognition is through a state medal. That is something that the citizens of Northern Ireland would agree with. I have been inundated with requests from constituents who want the Fire Service to receive a state medal as recognition. In the 30 years of the troubles and subsequently, the Fire Service has shown dedication and commitment to the job at hand. Without concern for their safety, members have shown singular courage and energy in safeguarding property and saving lives with limited resources and manpower. Their work has saved countless lives. Today, many owe their lives to an unknown firefighter who was simply doing his job, without looking for special treatment. They are humble men and women doing their best for society. They deserve a state metal struck under royal warrant.

Mr Danny O'Connor: I beg to move the following amendment: Delete all after "Assembly" and add
"will institute an Assembly award that recognises the great sacrifice and commitment to duty of members of the Fire Service in Northern Ireland, and liaise with the Fire Service unions/representatives to examine any further awards."
The amendment is in keeping with what was decided at last week’s Executive meeting. It is also in line with the statement that the Minister made this morning. About an hour ago, that statement was warmly welcomed on television by the Fire Brigades Union. I spoke to some of its members before coming into the Chamber, and they warmly welcomed the Minister’s statement. MrShannon is 100% right when he talks about the dedication to duty shown by those people. Some of them have pulled people out of burning bars, and it is an awful indictment of our society that they have had to undergo such traumatic incidents over and above the type of fires that a fireman ordinarily has to deal with. Firemen have been left to pick up the pieces of some of the most horrific acts of violence. I agree that there is a need to recognise what they have done, but better terms and conditions would be important steps towards achieving that.
MrShannon referred to the lack of numbers. In some cases, fire crews should be strengthened to enable them to do their job fully. The amendment will not preclude any further award, and it will allow us, as an Assembly, to make an award without requiring PeterMandelson’s permission. It will allow us to recognise the work that those people have done for this country over the years. In that spirit, I hope that the amendment will be well supported. We are not trying to score any points, but we need to present something that those people can say was awarded to them by the Assembly. Whether that takes the form of some kind of medal or a scroll is not for me to decide. However, the Assembly should institute some such award.
I and, indeed, my party are not normally in favour of political backslapping or giving awards. However, we believe that this case stands on its own merits. The service of the Fire Brigade and the men and women — unfortunately there are not all that many women — who risk their life should be recognised. If the amendment is accepted, that will in no way stop any further award being given by the Secretary of State. It would be an award made by the Assembly in recognition of the work done by the firefighters of this country. At a later date, as was suggested in the Minister’s statement this morning, it could be a matter for the Executive, through the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, to recommend, in consultation with the Fire Brigade, any subsequent awards. Our positions are probably not all that far apart, but I believe that, as an Assembly, we should be allowed to express ourselves in favour of the people who elected us and be able to recognise those people who have served our community rather than be totally dependent on the Secretary of State, who, ultimately, is not bound to accept any recommendation that the Assembly makes.

Mr John Kelly: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. The Minister told the Assembly in June that many people owed their life to the courage and skill of our firefighters and the important contribution of brigade support staff. She said that she and her Executive colleagues wanted to recognise such outstanding service in an appropriate and acceptable way. I endorse that statement. It is important that we keep the award to the Fire Service separate from the extraneous political undertones coming from the DUP. Is the striking of a medal about symbolism rather than about honouring the firemen who serve the entire community? Is the striking of a medal to the firemen an indication that the Fire Service belongs to only one section of the community? That would dishonour the Fire Service and make it difficult for people from my community to support or join it.
We have already witnessed a culture of discrimination in the Fire Service that made it difficult for young Nationalists — young Catholics — to join. It was difficult because of the culture that had been created around the Fire Service by successive Unionist establishments and an attempt to perpetuate — [Interruption]. It is cultural discrimination, and when I spoke to the firemen’s union even they admitted that over the years there had been an imbalance — [Interruption].

Ms Jane Morrice: Order.

Mr John Kelly: There has been — [Interruption].

Ms Jane Morrice: Order.

Mr John Kelly: There has been an imbalance — [Interruption].

Mr Peter Robinson: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. What does the issue of discrimination have to do with the motion?

Ms Jane Morrice: That is not a point of order — [Interruption].

Mr Peter Robinson: Of course it is. Can a point of order be any more a point of order if it questions whether the person who is speaking is relating his remarks to the motion?

Ms Jane Morrice: I ask the Member to explain; we would like to hear what he has to say.

Mr John Kelly: A LeasCheann Comhairle, I will explain.
In my opening paragraph I asked "Is the striking of the medal about symbolism?" If it is, then it is a divisive instrument that perpetuates the notion among Nationalists that there has been a culture of discrimination in the Fire Service. It is as simple as that. That fact was acknowledged by the firemen’s union when we had discussions with it and it hopes to redress it. The awarding of a medal with royal assent will not encourage young Nationalists to join the Fire Service, and neither does flying a flag over a fire station.

Mr Derek Hussey: Will the Member tell me whether what he has just said has any relevance to those excellent brigade members in Strabane? It has not.

Mr John Kelly: I am not suggesting that at all, Mr Hussey. What I am saying is that if we are to pursue the course that the DUP is suggesting —

Ms Jane Morrice: Please make your remarks through the Chair.

Mr John Kelly: If we are to pursue that course, we will create further division in the Fire Service. I was asking whether the striking of a medal would engender further division in an already divided community. We would better serve the community by getting behind an award to the Fire Service that has the full support of the Assembly, rather than one party’s using honour for the Fire Service to promote its own divisive political agenda.
We have heard time and time again from all parties about the need to strike out locally, to cure the ills of our Health Service, our education service and other elements of our infrastructure. This is a glorious opportunity for us, as an Assembly, to strike out on our own and devise some manner of rewarding, as honourably and completely as we can, the sacrifices that the Fire Service has made over the years.
I would also like to make a point about the culture of discrimination in the Fire Service that is perceived by the Nationalist community. I refer to the poor representation of women.

Mr Jim Shannon: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. What has that to do with the motion? The Member is talking about discrimination, which has nothing to do with a state medal. He is not addressing the issue of the proposal at all.

Ms Jane Morrice: The motion relates to the Fire Service in general. The Member may continue.

Mr John Kelly: To wind up — and there is a lot of winding up going on today — I must say that it is an opportunity for the Assembly, in consultation with the Executive, to strike out on its own and do something that is independent of divisive outside influences. This is our chance to honour the integrity, loyalty, good work and sacrifices of the Fire Service over the years.

Mrs Eileen Bell: I support the amendment. I would like to welcome members of the Fire Brigades Union who are, I think, in the Public Gallery. They have spoken to many Members today, and I hope that they will find the debate useful. I support the amendment, because I feel that the DUP’s motion is restricting both the Assembly and the Secretary of State, as my own did some weeks ago. However, I hope that the motion will be debated in the right atmosphere and that the firefighters of Northern Ireland will be left in absolutely no doubt that Assembly Members agree that there should be due recognition of the dedication, commitment and sacrifice of firefighters, past and present, on behalf of all the people of Northern Ireland.
When devolution was achieved, the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety was given the task of organising such an award. Accordingly, the Minister issued a statement in June that the award would be made. I quote from the beginning of her statement:
"I wish to advise Members of the arrangements being made to pay tribute to the exceptional service of the Fire Service over the last 30 years."
That followed a meeting of the Executive, during which the Minister spoke in a way similar to that in which she has spoken today, and which underlined the sense of appreciation of the Assembly.
One of the benefits of devolution is that we, as local representatives, could create some sort of appropriate award that would not preclude a decision by the Secretary of State to make a state award. We should be able to make our own decisions. Are we not mature enough to do that?
The Fire Brigades Union was supportive of the state awards made to the RUC and the prison officers. It was felt that, if the efforts of firefighters were to be properly recognised, their award should be of a similar stature. I have spoken to many firefighters from all over Northern Ireland, and they realise that there would be a difference between a corporate award and a state one. However, they would like both, if possible. These firefighters also said that it would be nice to be the first recipients of such an award from the Assembly.
Firefighting is a dangerous and potentially life- threatening undertaking. It is considerably more dramatic and varied than, for example, the picture painted by the television programme ‘London’s Burning’. There has been loss of life and serious injury throughout the brigade’s history. In my constituency last week, firefighters arrived at a scene to be greeted by two gunmen who would not let them near the blaze, despite the fact that things were happening that might have resulted in loss of life.
It is, I regret to say, a service that the public tends to take for granted. Firefighters are not just expected to put out fires and rescue people; they also have to rescue kittens up trees, free children from railings, help those who have been locked out of or inside buildings and aid those trapped in the aftermath of a road traffic accident. But for the efforts of the brigade, horrors such as La Mon, Abercorn and the others mentioned would have been even more horrific. I remind Members of the film footage that we have seen over the years of the troubles, with buildings crumbling in flames as they did in wartime. What was and is the first line of defence called upon to try to save both life and property? It is the Fire Brigade.
We, as an Assembly representing the people of Northern Ireland, cannot allow their efforts to be overlooked or undervalued as we move towards a new future for all of us. Such a future has been made possible by the bravery and selflessness of the men and women who protected our community from peril. The Fire Brigades Union has had meetings with the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. It was encouraged by her attitude. Today’s statement shows her prompt action in dealing with the matter. She will obviously make significant efforts to impress upon the Secretary of State the need to give serious consideration to the state’s giving appropriate recognition to the firefighters. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister will also consider what is appropriate.
It is fully within the remit of the Secretary of State to decide whether a state award should be made to the firefighters, but if it is decided that an Assembly medal is an appropriate award at this time, it will be the first ever. It will be locally decided and locally supported and, as such, will carry the heartfelt thanks of all the people of Northern Ireland with it. In its own way, that could be extremely hard to improve on, but a state award would be something that could still be considered. I have had many requests from firefighters. They maintain that they would be pleased to accept either, although more pleased to accept both.
I hope that the Minister’s statement will be unanimously supported. That will ensure that the Minister, the Secretary of State and the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister are all fully aware of the views of the Assembly, its Members and the people of Northern Ireland whom they represent. Our priority must be the recognition of all firefighters, past and present, who have kept our people and society safe and protected life and property throughout difficult times and against all odds. In spite of other problems, such as funding and manpower — and gender issues, I have to say — our priority must be the recognition of all firefighters who have played their demanding role to help us.
It is sad that the DUP cannot put the wishes of the firefighters ahead of its own political agenda. I hope that they will do that. I hope that all Members will speak on relevant matters today, and not use the debate as a vehicle for criticism or comment on others. To do so would be to do no service to those whom we have come here to support: the Fire Brigade, the firefighters, men and women of Northern Ireland.

Mr David Ervine: I am sure that the Fire Brigades Union wondered for a moment whether we were the right people to be talking about this when we began — or lapsed into — what seemed to be a divisive debate. I do not recognise the Fire Service described by Mr J Kelly. I could never imagine a postcode area where they would not go, or a house or a life that they would not attempt to save.

Mr John Kelly: I was not suggesting that, a LeasCheann Comhairle. What I said was that employment levels in the Fire Service did not adequately represent the Nationalist and Unionist make-up of our population, and that there was a chill factor, a culture of discrimination, against Nationalists’ joining the Fire Service.

Mr David Ervine: Against the backdrop of attempting to encourage the Assembly, and therefore society, the Member was not required to introduce such a negative element, regardless of how much he is wedded to that belief.
My understanding of firefighters is that we should value them all, no matter where they have served. We have seen them coping with terrible circumstances. The morning might begin with taking someone who has been decapitated out of a road traffic accident. In the afternoon, a child might be found — perfect, untouched, but asphyxiated by smoke. A firefighter has to carry that child out to all of those who will grieve. Those are the normal circumstances of the Fire Service.
Then, there is the unavoidable accidental horror, the avoidable accidental horror and the wanton destruction. Our society, unlike many others, has all three. The Fire Service is at the front of those who have to go — those who go on our behalf. I am pleased that the Minister has recognised the Fire Service and that there is recognition from all parts of the House. It is vital that the British Administration also recognise the sacrifice of the Fire Service.
Jim Shannon and Danny O’Connor referred to resources and to the circumstances under which the Fire Service functions. They save the British Exchequer billions of pounds under difficult circumstances, never measuring the risk to themselves. Some of us who have been close to victims that the Fire Service has had to deal with might look at such things somewhat differently. Accountants at Westminster look at it on the basis of what they have to pay out, for example, to give Essex perfect Fire Service cover. Northern Ireland gets the crumbs off the table.
Our men have been fighting the battle under those circumstances for many years. That is bad enough for a normal Fire Service. If it is a Fire Service in a place apart — Northern Ireland — suffering wanton destruction and the resultant horror, how much more significant is recognition by that Government of the Fire Service’s dedication under awful circumstances? They were under- resourced, but they behaved as they were expected to behave. Do we not expect that of trained firemen? The Fire Service has served the community above and beyond the call of duty, taking into consideration the lack of resources. Others, who did not have the same trauma and difficulty to deal with, received better treatment.
I shall make one final argument as to why it is so vital that there be a state award. MrO’Connor said that his amendment did not preclude what MrShannon wanted. However, it is also true that Mr Shannon’s motion does not preclude what Mr O’Connor wants. There is no reason why the Minister could not approach the Secretary of State to make him aware of the depth of feeling about this. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, we could recognise the value of the work of the Northern Ireland Fire Service, even though we have only just assumed responsibility for it. The Minister should tell the Secretary of State or the Prime Minister that they would be as well to do the same — the honourable, decent thing. However, such a scenario was not forthcoming. That is a serious disappointment.
We have only just taken over responsibility for the Fire Service. The people who previously had the responsibility, and who ought to pay tribute, are at Westminster. Northern Ireland is a part of the United Kingdom, and the United Kingdom Exchequer benefited from the skills and tireless efforts of the Fire Service. It is fundamentally important that that recognition be complete, and that both Houses recognise the Fire Service. What harm would that do? Who would feel insulted? Fire Service personnel of both religions and none have risked their life saving others in every postcode area. The Fire Service had to deal with road traffic and other accidents, as well as the wanton destruction that was visited on our society by the troubles, irrespective of who caused it.
My support for the motion does not mean that I feel wholly negatively towards the amendment. There is goodwill on these Benches. I appeal to the Minister to give serious consideration to lobbying on behalf of the Northern Ireland Fire Service. It would not go amiss and might settle the worries of Members who feel — probably wrongly — that there is some sinister reason to explain why the Minister is not prepared to do so.

Mr Derek Hussey: I shall speak on the motion and the amendment. As Mr Ervine said, we must look at both options. However, I would like to know what is meant by these words in the amendment:
"to examine any further awards".
I want an explanation of what the Executive intend to put to the Secretary of State.
Throughout the 30 years of terrorism, the people of Northern Ireland had the good fortune to have a number of emergency services dedicated to the preservation of law and order and the protection of life and property. The exceptional dedication of members of the RUC and the suffering that they endured have been recognised by the award of the George Cross to the corporate body. That award was instituted in 1940 to honour great heroism and conspicuous courage. In August, the Secretary of State confirmed that approval in principle had been granted by the Queen to the award of a special medal to prison staff in Northern Ireland. That was also in recognition of the professionalism, bravery and commitment of prison staff in serving the community over the past difficult, and often dangerous, 30 years. That medal, unlike the George Cross, is to be awarded to serving and former prison staff who have served with the Northern Ireland Prison Service for at least five years.
Today, the Assembly is rightly debating how it can properly recognise the exceptional service given by part-time and full-time members of the Northern Ireland Fire Service. That service has been given over the past 30 years of terrorism in Northern Ireland and, indeed, extends to many duties beyond those linked to terrorism. Their basic duties of attending normal incidents — if one can call them normal — of fire and vehicle accidents have been hindered by increased call-outs due to terrorist attacks on community and business. Their dedication to duty must be rewarded. I am aware, in my constituency, of the horrors that part-time and full-time firemen have had to face in carrying out their duties. They are in action night after night, engaging in hazardous operations — many times at the mercy of the elements. Part-time volunteers have had to carry on with their normal jobs and businesses as well. Some tribute should also be paid to those employers who have allowed employees who are part-time firemen to go when the call arises.
In 1954, the Committee on the Grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals agreed the issue of the Fire Brigade Long Service and Good Conduct Medal, with the approval of the Queen. It is awarded for 20 years’ service with good conduct. In the same year, another medal was struck, and it was to be awarded to members of recognised fire brigades for distinguished service. That medal may also be posthumously awarded for gallantry, and was named the Queen’s Fire Medal. I believe that several officers in Northern Ireland have been honoured in that way.
Any award recognising the bravery of the Fire Service must be proper and adequate in status. I believe that a civic award is an insult. It has been rejected by the Fire Brigades Union and, indeed, by the Fire Authority itself. I welcome the fact that the Executive have recognised that a corporate award from the Assembly is more appropriate than the civic award first proposed. We have all received a note from the Fire Brigades Union highlighting the options that are available to the Assembly. One of the options that we are considering is to pursue corporate recognition within the purview of the Northern Ireland Assembly and, at the same time, making all possible efforts to achieve full state-endorsed recognition. I trust — I wait for the reply with reference to the amendment — that that is what is in the minds of those who are moving the amendment. Like Mrs Bell, I urge most fervently that the First Minister and Deputy First Minister pursue, through the Secretary of State, a proper state award for the Fire Service. I believe that it can be achieved.
A state award granted by the Queen to recognise the professionalism, bravery and commitment of all members of our Fire Service during the past 30 years of the terrorist campaign is, without doubt, appropriate. I regret the remarks that we have heard about possible discrimination within the service. I am sure that if somebody is standing at a window or trapped in a car, the first question asked is not whether he is a Protestant, a Catholic, a Nationalist or a Unionist. The firefighters do not ask the person, and the person that they are helping does not ask them. It does not come into the question. I know many brave brigade members from both sides of the community, and I have never been aware of any discrimination within the service.
I urge the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and the Executive to petition the Secretary of State to give the same consideration to the Fire Service as has been granted to the Northern Ireland Prison Service. I further urge that the Assembly recognise the great service that the Northern Ireland Fire Service has given to the community.

Mr John Dallat: If the proposers of the motion have the Fire Service and its interests at heart, they will have no problem accepting the amendment, because it offers greater flexibility than the motion. We are often accused of harking back to the past, but it is fair to say that the Fire Service began its life following the great fire of London in 1666. That was 24years before the battle of the Boyne. The Fire Service has moved on since then — sometimes the motions before the House remain in that period.
Nearly 30years ago, I was in FoyleStreet in Derry while firemen dealt with a fire at the City Hotel. I was there not for the excitement but because two firemen were trapped inside. I am sad to say that they lost their lives. We must be careful not to make political capital out of the lives and deaths of firemen. We have a duty to respect them, and we have not done that today. The firemen do not want the issue to become yet another excuse for secretarian politics. They would prefer it to be settled in another way.
The House did itself no favours whatsoever when news of a medal was first announced. In the mad rush to create sound bites and score political points, Members behaved in the most disgraceful manner. What a pity it is that those Members were not so vocal when the Fire Service was repeatedly attacked in their constituencies with stones and bottles. The Fire Service was not the issue then, and neither is it now. We must bear that in mind.
The decision to honour the Fire Service was initiated by the former Minister of the Environment, LordDubs, and acted upon by the present Minister of HSS&PS, MsdeBrún, and there the matter should rest. To do otherwise is to do the opposite of what is proposed in the motion. No one disputes the great sacrifice and commitment to duty of members of the Fire Service. However, the issue should not become a political football, because that is not in anyone’s interest, and certainly not in the interest of the Fire Service. Members may know that the Northern Ireland Fire Service is currently experiencing difficulty recruiting new members, particularly in rural areas. Emergency calls are answered by skeleton crews, and that is of greater concern than political arguments about the origins of a medal. If we allow that controversy to continue, an even smaller number of volunteers will come forward, because when politicians get their grubby hands on organisations and politicise them, experience tells us that they do those services no favours.
The Fire Service does not need such a controversial debate. Instead, it needs hard working politicians who are prepared to take as many risks in the interests of peace as they have done. Society views this type of motion as a time-wasting opportunity for gaining political capital at the expense of the services that Members claim to represent. In the past, another section of the emergency services was used for political purposes, namely the police service. Are we going to feed the Fire Service to the political vultures as well? I hope not.
I support the amendment. This is a one-off occasion, and I look forward to the implementation of the Minister’s proposals. I salute the Fire Service for the work that it has done, not just over the past 30 years but since its inception.

Mr Paul Berry: I support the motion, and I welcome the opportunity to raise this serious matter. It is regrettable that we have to raise it in the Assembly. It is regrettable that the dedication and sacrifice of the Fire Service have not been recognised. It makes me sick sometimes to listen to the likes of John Dallat and members of Sinn Féin/IRA when they accuse my party colleagues of introducing party politics to the issue. It is too serious for party politics. I remind Mr Dallat that the Fire Brigades Union did not meet only the DUP. It also met representatives of the Ulster Unionist Party, Danny O’Connor from the SDLP, Sinn Féin, the Alliance Party and the PUP. It also met the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, who is a member of Sinn Féin/IRA. Indeed, I spoke to the Fire Brigades Union myself today. We are not using this politically.
The Fire Brigades Union represents 95% of uniformed Fire Service personnel and recommends a corporate award. It also stresses that it wants to see a state awarded medal for the Fire Service. That is the message that the DUP got, and I am sure that it is the message that the SDLP and other political parties also received — in no way was the Fire Brigades Union being political. It represents people of all backgrounds, including Roman Catholics, Protestants, those of other religions and people without religious belief.
Today’s statement from the Minister included no com -mitment. She is making it the responsibility of the First and Deputy First Ministers to investigate whether a state award medal is possible or appropriate. The award of a state medal to the Fire Service is important, and I hope that the First and Deputy First Ministers will be recommending it to the Government and the Secretary of State rather than investigating whether it is appropriate or not.
We must listen closely to what the Fire Service and its representatives want. I have consulted ordinary fire officers and the chief fire officer at his Lisburn headquarters, and I received a clear message from the latter that, while they recommend awards, they also want to be recognised with a state-awarded medal. It has been said repeatedly today that the Fire Service has served our community with great distinction. It has sacrificed a lot, and officers have lost colleagues in the line of duty.
Loved ones have lost their husbands and fathers because of the dedication with which they served the entire community. I find it regrettable that the question of discrimination was brought into the debate today. As the hon Member for West Tyrone (Mr Hussey) said, Fire Service officers never questioned whether a house was Roman Catholic or Protestant when they were at the scene. I say to Members who talk of discrimination that they should go to a place such as Crossmaglen and get a religious breakdown of those at the Fire Service station. Then we would know all about discrimination. It is ridiculous that the issue was brought into todays debate.
Firefighters responded to over 31,000 incidents across Northern Ireland in 1999-2000, rescuing over 700 people in road traffic accidents and other special service calls. In no way are we being political about the issue. It is because of the sacrifice, dedication and distinction with which the Fire Service has served the community that it should have a state-awarded medal. I call on the House to back the motion for such a medal.
The Health Minister’s statement does not go far enough. I am getting a clear message from the Fire Brigades Union that it will accept nothing less. I call on the House to support the motion, and I trust that the views of the Fire Brigades Union and all the ordinary fire officers throughout the country will be listened to, for they serve the entire community and have safeguarded our society over the past 30 years of the troubles.
Mr Dallat said that certain politicians were not quick to support the Fire Service when it was under attack from their own community. In this corner of the House, we state clearly that we are well aware that the Fire Service came under attack not only from the Republican or Nationalist community but from Loyalists: we condemn that outright. We condemn those in our own community who attacked the Fire Service, for it is a neutral service that has served the entire community in Northern Ireland. I condemn attacks carried out on members of the Fire Service from whatever section of the community they come. After all, they were going out to save lives, which is the most important thing.
I support the motion and call on the House to do so. Once again, I remind Members to listen closely to what the Fire Brigades Union and other members of the Fire Service have told us. A state-awarded medal must come as soon as possible.

Ms Sue Ramsey: Go raibh maith agat, Madam Deputy Speaker. I also welcome today’s announcement by the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, in which she informed the Assembly of the Executive’s decision to grant the Fire Authority a corporate award. I also wish to express my thanks to the Fire Authority and my gratitude for the sacrifice and commitment of individual members.
My Colleague, John Kelly, was not saying anything about firefighters discriminating about where they went, or about postcodes when responding to fires or road traffic accidents. He was pointing out that discrimination has been recorded in the employment of Catholics in the Fire Authority. The motion tabled by Jim Shannon and William Hay shows us exactly where the DUP is coming from. It is clearly about marking out Unionist territory. The idea of a proposed state award to the Fire Service is about rewarding one section of the community more than another, and we cannot allow that to happen. The motion shows the DUP in its true-blue colours of non-inclusiveness again. The DUP showed it in the Assembly last week when it talked about victims. It assumed that some victims are better than others, that some families’ suffering is better than others. Victims of state violence are of no importance to them. We are on the road to equality, whether the DUP likes it or not.
We must have equal recognition for all in the Fire Authority, and the announcement of a corporate award today will achieve that. A local award will be acceptable to all, not just one section of the community. Mr Shannon said that the Fire Service is made up of men and women — sadly, a small percentage of women, which is another argument for another day — from both sides of the community, and I am glad that he recognises that. However, he must recognise that a section of the Fire Service will resent the proposal of a state award. That cannot be good for staff morale. We have heard throughout the debate about funding and staffing.
A state award, as proposed by the DUP, is about wanting to recognise only the Unionist tradition. There are Nationalists in it too. Any award should take account of all traditions. Mrs Bell and Mr Ervine said that there were people of no religion, and an award should take account of that. An award should be acceptable to all sections of the community. An award that reflects the ethos of one community cannot, and will not, be inclusive.
Nobody will dispute the service that the Fire Authority has given to society, but I want to point out that a state award is a British award and will not be acceptable to Nationalists in the Fire Service. The Good Friday Agreement says
"All participants acknowledge the sensitivity of the use of symbols and emblems for public purposes, and the need in particular in creating the new institutions to ensure that such symbols and emblems are used in a manner which promotes mutual respect rather than division."
The DUP’s motion does not take that on board. Where is the sensitivity in the motion? Coming from a party that has worked against the agreement, the Executive and the notion — God forbid — of equality for Nationalists, it is of no surprise to me. The DUP and others in the Assembly need to face up to the fact that the Nationalist community is off its knees, and it is not going back. It will achieve equality.
A state award will discourage Nationalists from joining the Fire Service, but that may suit the movers of the motion. My party will not support the motion, but we will support the amendment put forward by Mr O’Connor. Unlike the DUP, we support equality for all in the community. Go raibh maith agat.

Mr Mervyn Carrick: The degree of rancour that has been introduced into the debate is regrettable. As I read the motion, I have some difficulty finding the party political agenda referred to by Sinn Féin/IRA and the Member from the Alliance Party.
There can be no equivocation, no doubt and no prevarication. The amendment proposed by Mr O’Connor smacks of an intermediate step. The vast majority of people in Northern Ireland have no difficulty in accepting the valour, bravery, courage, dedication and sacrifice of the Northern Ireland Fire Service.
We do not need an intermediate step; we want to go for the full thing, which is the purpose of the motion. Even to the most casual, impartial observer, it must be obvious that members of the Northern Ireland Fire Service have played an invaluable, vital and distinctive role in society. Their extraordinary and special role over the past 30 years of terrorist bombings and mayhem has demanded the highest degree of bravery and heroism. Risking life and limb, firefighters never shirked from their duty, even in the most horrific circumstances or even when they were under physical attack from onlooking hate-mongers who associated themselves with sectarian terrorist crimes.
That commitment and dedication is further emphasised when one takes into account the fact that many firefighters are part-time, retained firefighters. They did not enjoy the same advantages and support that the RUC and the Ambulance Service did when responding to emergency calls. In response to calls, part-time firefighters had to leave their home or place of work and negotiate their way through traffic to the fire station, without the help of distinctive sirens or signs fitted to their vehicle. Those retained firefighters suffered much stress, as did their families, who did not know whether they would return home uninjured or return home at all.
Despite a campaign by families of retained firefighters, that handicap for part-time members of the Fire Service has yet to be dealt with. I call upon the chief fire officer to adequately and speedily address the issue in consultation with retained firefighters. In view of the danger that such men encountered and their courage in the face of adversity, it is scandalous to deny a state award in recognition of the sterling sacrificial service rendered by Fire Service personnel in what was in many cases a hostile environment.
Many of our firefighters have served throughout the entire period of civil unrest. We owe those brave officers a great debt of gratitude. They bear physical and psychological scars, testimony to the horrific and traumatic circumstances in which they had to carry out their duties on behalf of all of us. We are all aware from experiences in our constituencies of many acts of heroism, bravery and sacrifice. It is only fitting, therefore, that the brave firefighters, and their families, be properly recognised with a state award and nothing less than a state award. Anything less for the Fire Service personnel in Northern Ireland would be a calculated snub for the gallant and brave members of that meritorious emergency service.

Mr Oliver Gibson: I am rather disheartened by some of the words used in the debate. I was surprised that the Executive, and indeed the Minister, who is responsible for emergency services, should think of making a distinction between the level of bravery and the level of award.
What is so different about an Indian surgeon in Omagh receiving an OBE — a state award? Have the Minister and the Executive caved in to the idea that there should be various levels of reward for bravery? The Minister needs to rethink her position on that subject. She is responsible for this emergency service, so how could she suggest that Fire Service personnel, who have given great service to every member of the community, are not as brave as those in other emergency services?
It was a devout Roman Catholic who saved my brother’s premises when they were petrol bombed. It was an equally hard-working and respected Roman Catholic who saved my own premises when my car was set on fire at two o’clock in the morning. I cannot understand the claims of bigotry and sectarianism from the SinnFéin Benches. However, I see the duplicity that they have demonstrated over the past few days. It is perfectly all right for Nationalists and Republicans to use the state when they are seeking a judicial review in the High Court if they think that the state will cave in, but when it comes to recognising a state award, the evasion, the equivocation and the hiding begins. That has been demonstrated here today, initiated by Mr J Kelly and continued by Ms Ramsey and others. Indeed, it has been a desperate indication that it is not equality that they recognise, but inequality. They are almost saying to the rest of the community that if something is not Catholic, it should not exist — and that is horrifying. The equality laws will be put to good use in my community. I will take every opportunity to make sure that the coalition of greed that has often denied the Protestant community is rectified. I want to make that point clear.
Other emergency services have had their reward, and those have been mentioned. Why should the bravery of someone who releases a young 20-year-old from the wreck of a car on the A5 Ballygawley-Omagh road and staunches the flow of blood from a severed artery not have equal recognition with the surgeon who tenderly sews up that person’s wounds and restores him to health? One can be given a state award. Doctors and nurses have received those awards, and our police and the prison service will receive them. Why not apply equality fully and ensure that our gallant Fire Service personnel also receive equality of recognition through a state award?
It is almost sinful to think that a Minister in charge of the Fire Service — a service that all of us depend on for life, limb and home — is even thinking along the lines that I have heard this afternoon.
I am also surprised that someone in the SDLP whom I respect — Mr Danny O’Connor — should have succumbed to SinnFéin’s duplicity. Some people talked about there being no guns inside the door, outside the door or under the table but quickly forgot their words. When I respect someone, I do not expect him to depart from known and accepted standards. I did not expect that from those who can make the distinction, but I expect it from those who find it difficult to tell the truth at any time. It was almost foreseeable that Sinn Féin would not recognise a state award. Over the weekend, they were quite prepared to use the state for other legal activities.
Let us introduce equality into the debate, and recognise the service that Members have talked about. Every Member who has spoken has paid, quite rightly, a glowing tribute to the bravery of the members of the Fire Service. I know of 126 people in my constituency who can testify to their bravery. So let us honour those people who have honoured us with their professionalism.
I thank Mr Shannon and Mr Hay for proposing a state award. There should be equality for all, and no distinction in what constitutes an act of bravery. Let us be fair to the Fire Service.

Mr Ivan Davis: I want to pay tribute to the Fire Brigades Union. Throughout the debate, it has kept Members fully informed of what is taking place. I am disappointed that there have been sentiments expressed today that have not helped that debate.
When the matter was first raised, I remember asking the Minister about a friend of mine from Longstone Street in Lisburn who was killed during the troubles. He was blown up on the Stewartstown Road. The debate has moved on from that. However, when the matter was originally raised with the previous direct rule Minister, Lord Dubs, the answer given was as follows:
"The Minister is emphatic that there will be no state awards to Northern Ireland bodies"
We have moved on a bit — albeit slowly — from Lord Dubs’s day. He was emphatic that there would be no state award, but we are at long last moving in the right direction. Although one can have sympathy with the motion and the amendment, I personally believe that the amendment gives both. Therefore I do not see any difficulty in our supporting the amendment.
A fortnight ago, Alliance Party Members withdrew their motion because, as I understand it, they wanted to talk to the Minister. Eventually, the matter was brought to the Executive where it was discussed last week. Arising out of that discussion, we had the Minister’s statement this morning. It said
"The Executive also agreed that the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister should investigate whether a State Award would also be achievable or appropriate."
I am prepared to run with that.
There has been talk today about the Fire Brigades Union. It has spoken with me, and I have taken guidance from it, as have other Members. Therefore, on the advice that I have been given, and because I believe we can achieve it all, I support the amendment.

Mr Gardiner Kane: I feel privileged to register my support for the motion. The unconditional discharge of duties by the Northern Ireland Fire Brigade is beyond dispute. In the protection of people and property and during periods of extreme civil unrest when bombings and violence seemed to reach new heights, the officers of the Northern Ireland Fire Brigade were there.
A debt of gratitude is felt not only by civilians but also by the business community, which stood to lose so much as bombers targeted the commercial hearts of towns and cities. Without the efforts of the Fire Service, countless more properties — on which all communities depended for supplies — would have been lost.
The personal risk was and is just as great for Fire Service personnel when dealing with emergencies unrelated to terrorism. In North Antrim, firefighter Robin Neil lost his life when attempting to rescue an individual from a farmyard well. He, along with two others, was heroically taken by officer Charles McAuley from the well where they had been asphyxiated. The three men did not survive, but are we to ignore the heroism of the firefighter who lost his life and the officer who risked all to save lives?
That is the level of risk under which the personnel of the Fire Service work. It is the level of risk and the willingness to take risks that the motion asks us to acknowledge. If we are to demonstrate our coming of age as a society, we must commend the work of those who made sacrifices and took risks to secure our safety, often at the cost of their own life. That sacrifice was made by, and on behalf of, both sections of our community.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Gabhaim buíochas leis an Uasal Hay as an tsaincheist seo a thabhairt go hUrlár an Tí. Gabhaim buíochas fosta leis an Uasal O’Connor as an leasú a mhol sé. Tá mé sásta go raibh mé in ann freastal ar an díospóireacht seo agus chuir mé suim, agus mé ag éisteacht, i mbarúlacha Teachtaí.
I thank Mr Shannon and Mr Hay for bringing the issue to the House, and Mr O’Connor for his amendment. The amendment is timely, considering the Executive’s decision at last Thursday’s meeting, on which I reported to Members this morning.
I am pleased to have been able to attend the debate, and I have listened with interest. I support the sentiments expressed by members of all parties about the courage, dedication and commitment of the Fire Service. We also heard about the difficulties facing firefighters in their work — some specific examples were given — and the exceptional service given by firefighters and their support staff over the past 30 years.
As I said this morning, the Executive have agreed that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister should investigate whether a state award is achievable or appropriate. The Executive decided that consideration should be given to what form the state award might take. The Executive will reconsider the matter when that work is completed.
Reference was made to the British Administration prior to the establishment of the Executive. Lord Dubs made his position clear on the subject in a radio interview on 6 October. Points were also made about value for money, comparisons with other services, pay and conditions and other practical measures concerned with the Fire Service. The Fire Service compares well with other services, as has been confirmed recently by the fire inspector’s report. People need to realise that pay and conditions of service are not negotiated locally. They are agreed by the joint council, which is made up of employers and Fire Brigades Union representatives. The Fire Brigade is also making every effort on the recruitment, retention and the career progression of women.
Some people suggested that the Fire Brigades Union would only accept a state award, but that was not the position presented to me at its October meeting. I was careful to listen and record the alternatives that it proposed. An OBE is awarded to an individual. Therefore comparisons between individual surgeons and what is being suggested in my statement, or in the amendment, would be unfair.
This morning, I made a statement that the Executive had reconsidered a previous decision on the form that recognition of outstanding service should take. I reiterate that the performance has been outstanding. The Executive agreed that a corporate award by the Assembly would be more appropriate. They also agreed that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister should investigate whether a state award for the Fire Service would be achievable or appropriate, and they will consider that again at a later date.

Mr Danny O'Connor: Some Members have said that the amendment in some way precludes a further award. It does not. The decision taken by the Executive last week was that the dedication and courage of our firefighters should be acknowledged. MrsBell rightly said that the Assembly has never made an award to anybody, so for the Fire Service to be the recipient of an inaugural award would make it even more prestigious. I deliberately tried to stay clear of the political points that others chose to make, and I tried to be as apolitical as possible. I am not trying to cast a slur, as has been suggested, on firefighters, or the Fire Brigades Union, by proposing the amendment. The amendment allows people to put something in their pocket and look for something else.
The award mentioned in the motion is outside our gift. It is dependent on the Secretary of State, and he does not have to grant our requests. The award stated in the amendment is within our gift. It is within the gift of the Assembly to create an award that will adequately reward the people who have served this country so well over many years and in many horrific incidents. MrErvine said that the amendment and the motion were not exclusive. My amendment does not exclude the further possibility of some other type of award. However, the motion does not allow the Assembly to make an award. We should bear in mind the Minister’s statement that the Executive have agreed that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister should investigate whether a state award would be achievable or appropriate.
We should bear in mind Mr Davis’s reiteration of the statement by Lord Dubs that no state awards would be made to Northern Ireland bodies. The important factor is to decide whether such a move is achievable or appropriate, but such matters should not be aired in public. It is for the Minister and the Executive to discuss any such forthcoming issues.
My amendment is an attempt to recognise, in an non-divisive way, all those who gave gallant service, without discrimination. I recognise the bravery of all those people, and we owe them a debt of gratitude. But a debt of gratitude is not necessarily enough; we need to create an award that will make service members feel that we, as their representatives, acknowledge what they have done. We must give them something that it is within our power to offer.

Mr William Hay: During the debate, it was difficult to tell whether Members were referring to the same amendment and the same motion. If Members had listened to Mr Shannon, they would know that he did not make any political points in his speech. The parties opposite, who lectured us about not bringing politics into the issue, did just that.
The amendment does not go far enough. It falls short of an appropriate recognition of the bravery of our Fire Service members in Northern Ireland. Members should read the Minister’s statement about what she is trying to achieve. I remind Members that, a few weeks ago, the Alliance Party brought a motion to the House. On the day of debate, it withdrew the motion, but it did not give its reason for doing so. It was probably an attempt to do some deal with the Minister.

Mrs Eileen Bell: On a point of information.

Mr William Hay: There is no such thing as a point of information in this House — [Interruption].

Ms Jane Morrice: Order. The Member who is winding up has been asked to give way.

Mr William Hay: No. The Alliance party has had two bites of the cherry here, or perhaps three. As I said, it had an opportunity to move a motion in the House a fortnight ago, but we were not told why the motion was withdrawn. There is no point — [Interruption].

Mrs Eileen Bell: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. May I point out once again that in my statement to the Assembly I gave a reason for withdrawing? If Mr Hay does not know it — [Interruption].

Ms Jane Morrice: That is not a point of order. Mr Hay, please continue.

Mr William Hay: I shall take up my point about the Alliance Party again. I think it is extremely important, irrespective of the excuses that we are hearing today, that Alliance Members had an opportunity and they missed it. There is no point in their coming to the House today to complain. As for the comments that were made by Sinn Féin/IRA, as always we treat them with contempt — [Interruption].

Mr John Kelly: Is it in order for a Member to describe another party by a name other than that designated in the Register of the Assembly?

Ms Jane Morrice: I shall come back to you on that point.

Mr William Hay: We seem to be ruffling a few feathers in the House this afternoon, which does not surprise me. I was about to say that what was left out of the Minister’s statement — [Interruption]

Ms Jane Morrice: Order. The Member is entitled to speak.

Mr William Hay: We have heard Sinn Féin/IRA go through a number of issues today. Nightly, in my constituency, the Fire Service is stoned in Republican areas. It is rather sad that we have to bring the motion to the House. Had the British Government wanted to recognise the service that the firefighters have given to Northern Ireland over the years, they could have done so. MrErvine said that we needed to get the British Government on board to recognise properly the job that firemen have done. We all know that many areas of the Fire Service have been underfunded over the years.
There is something that needs to be said: we have had a terrorist campaign of bombing, burning and shooting in the Province for 30 years. Many of the Fire Service personnel who were injured in those bombings, burnings and shootings paid the supreme price. I do not need lectures from Sinn Féin/IRA on how to behave. The Minister seems to forget that the Northern Ireland Fire Service has suffered severely over the past 30 years of violence. We all know that throughout the troubles, many of our Fire Service personnel had to retire early because of serious injury. In fact, I will go further. Many of them, under difficult circumstances, risked their life to save others.
It is a tragedy that the debate has turned the way that it has. Mr Danny O’Connor heard from the union representative who contacted him today that there should be a state award. I think, Mr O’Connor, that that was made clear to you as you spoke to the union representative over the telephone.

Ms Jane Morrice: Order. The Member should address the Chair.

Mr William Hay: There seems to be a problem. I know that the Fire Brigades Union met all political parties in Northern Ireland, and the message that came across was that the proper recognition would be a state medal. That is the message that Danny O’Connor, representing the SDLP, got this afternoon from a union representative. I would ask Mr O’Connor to state that — not now but in the future. It needs to be made clear.
If the Minister does not have the courage to consider a state medal, the matter should be taken out of her hands. What is being proposed in the amendment and the statement would not be acceptable to the union representatives of the Fire Service personnel. I do not believe that the Minister has the courage or the strength to take the matter forward in the manner that it requires. I ask the Secretary of State to take it out of her hands. He should deal with it.
I have no faith in the First and Deputy First Ministers dealing with the matter either. It is wrong for some Ulster Unionists to support the amendment, because they know that it does not go far enough. They are hoping that the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister will make everything all right, but we know that that will not be the case.
Some Members say that we can give an award and then possibly look at a state award. The motion asks only that we make representations to the Secretary of State for a state award. That is all. One would think from listening to some of those who spoke on the amendment that we are asking for some great task to be undertaken. If we genuinely want to recognise the firefighters of Northern Ireland, there is only one way to do it, and that is a state award. That is the message from the union representatives of the firefighters of Northern Ireland. That is the only way in which it can be done.
If the Minister responsible for the issue cannot deal with it, we should get someone else who can — and I do not mean the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.
Question put, 
The Assembly divided: Ayes 43; Noes 22.
Ayes
Alex Attwood, Roy Beggs, Billy Bell, Eileen Bell, P J Bradley, Joe Byrne, Robert Coulter, John Dallat, Duncan Shipley Dalton, Ivan Davis, Bairbre de Brún, Arthur Doherty, Mark Durkan, Reg Empey, Sean Farren, John Fee, David Ford, Sam Foster, Tommy Gallagher, Michelle Gildernew, Carmel Hanna, Joe Hendron, John Hume, Derek Hussey, John Kelly, Patricia Lewsley, Alban Maginness, Kieran McCarthy, Alasdair McDonnell, Alan McFarland, Michael McGimpsey, Eddie McGrady, Gerry McHugh, Pat McNamee, Francie Molloy, Sean Neeson, Danny O’Connor, Dara O’Hagan, Eamonn ONeill, Sue Ramsey, Ken Robinson, John Tierney, David Trimble.
Noes
Fraser Agnew, Paul Berry, Gregory Campbell, Mervyn Carrick, Wilson Clyde, Nigel Dodds, David Ervine, Oliver Gibson, William Hay, David Hilditch, Roger Hutchinson, Gardiner Kane, William McCrea, Maurice Morrow, Ian Paisley Jnr, Edwin Poots, Mark Robinson, Peter Robinson, Jim Shannon, Denis Watson, Jim Wells, Sammy Wilson.
Question accordingly agreed to.
Main question, as amended, put and agreed to.
Resolved:
That this Assembly will institute an Assembly award that recognises the great sacrifice and commitment to duty of members of the Fire Service in Northern Ireland, and liaise with the Fire Service unions/representatives to examine any further awards.
Adjourned at 5.58 pm.